The College of Law at University of Baghdad discussed a PhD dissertation titled “Preventive Public Interest in Judicial Practice”, submitted by the student Asmaa Dawood Salman, in the Private Law Department, on Thursday, 18/6/2026, in the college conference hall.
The examination committee consisted of the following professors:
- Prof. Dr. Amal Kazem Saud (Chairman)
- Prof. Dr. Ali Motashar Abdul Sahib (Member)
- Asst. Prof. Dr. Amer Ghanem Alwan (Member)
- Asst. Prof. Dr. Nada Abdul Kadhim Hussein (Member)
- Prof. Dr. Haider Faleh Hassan (Member and Supervisor)
The dissertation aimed to clarify the role of preventive public interest in strengthening the court’s authority in managing litigation and directing its procedures in a way that achieves justice. It focuses on enabling courts to take necessary measures on their own initiative to ensure the proper conduct of litigation, prevent waste of time, effort, and costs, and avoid proceeding with cases that may become ineffective or lapse. This aligns with the principle of procedural economy and achieves a balance between protecting litigants’ rights and safeguarding the public interest in the proper administration of justice.
The dissertation was divided into three chapters: the first addressed the legal basis of the court’s authority in applying preventive public interest, the second examined its manifestations, and the third discussed the effects resulting from its application.
The study concluded with several recommendations, most notably:
- It calls on the Iraqi legislator to amend Article (27) of the Civil Procedure Law and make it a general rule, so that procedural acts are considered invalid not only in relation to service of process but in all forms of defects affecting procedural validity. The proposed wording is: “A procedural act shall be deemed void if it is affected by a defect or a substantial deficiency that undermines its validity or defeats its purpose.”
- It proposes amending Article (75) of the Civil Procedure Law as follows: (1) The court shall consolidate related cases, either on its own initiative or upon request of one of the parties, whether the cases are before the same court or different courts. (2) Consolidated cases shall be referred to the court in which the first case was filed, and a decision rejecting consolidation shall be subject to appeal by cassation/appeal (review).
