Iraq's Supreme Court delays ruling on controversial maritime deal with Kuwait amid growing political tensions

Iraq's Federal Supreme Court has delayed its decision on whether to reinstate the annulled Khor Abdullah maritime agreement with Kuwait, intensifying legal and political tensions over the contentious waterway that forms a vital artery for Iraq's maritime trade.

The court announced on Tuesday it would postpone hearings on appeals submitted by President Abdul Latif Rashid and Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani until 30 April, without offering a reason. 

The appeals challenge the court's September 2023 ruling that struck down Law 42 of 2013—the law ratifying the Iraq-Kuwait agreement governing navigation through the 120-km Khor Abdullah channel.  

During an interview with The New Arab last week, Hawre Tofiq, an adviser to the Iraqi president, dismissed reports that the president had filed an appeal to the top court. He was unavailable for further comment when contacted again by TNA.

The court had found the original ratification lacked the constitutional two-thirds parliamentary majority required for international treaties, declaring the law invalid—a move that sparked diplomatic friction with Kuwait and fierce domestic debate over Iraqi sovereignty and constitutional authority.

Unusually, both the president and prime minister have independently sought to reverse the ruling, prompting speculation about whether their motivations are legal, diplomatic, or political. 

Although the court's rulings are normally final, Article 45 of its internal statute allows for reconsideration under 'constitutional or public interest' grounds, as long as legal stability is not compromised.

Kurdish legal experts told TNA this clause could serve as the only avenue for revisiting the case.

Iraq's top judge's visit to Kuwait raises eyebrows

Adding intrigue, Iraq's Chief Justice Faiq Zidan visited Kuwait a day after the court announced its delay, where he was hosted by his Kuwaiti counterpart, Adel Boursli. Although both sides described the visit as routine judicial cooperation, the timing has fuelled speculation about potential behind-the-scenes negotiations over the maritime dispute.

The case has revived longstanding corruption allegations. Former border demarcation official Jamal al-Halbousi last week told TNA that "unprofessional" appeals were undermining Iraq's sovereign interests and claimed—without evidence—that Kuwaiti envoys had offered gifts to Iraqi politicians to lobby for reinstating the treaty. Kuwait has denied the charges.

Halbousi warned that any reversal of the court’s decision would cost Iraq "key oilfields such as Jamal Twaina 1 and 2, vast maritime zones, and significant customs revenue", and argued that only parliament could legally re-ratify the treaty with a two-thirds majority.

Parliament Sidestepped

On Tuesday, the head of Iraq's parliamentary legal committee, Mohammed Anouz, told Al-Maalomah Iraqi website that the executive branch was bypassing parliament on this critical matter: "The individual actions of the three presidencies over the Khor Abdullah agreement are happening without referring the matter to parliament. This is a clear constitutional violation."

Anouz warned that continued legislative paralysis could allow the executive to monopolise decision-making on sensitive sovereignty issues.

In a further twist, former transport minister Amir Abdul Jabbar Ismael has filed a criminal complaint against Prime Minister Sudani, alleging he ordered ministries not to forward the Supreme Court's decision to the United Nations and International Maritime Organisation—a move critics say undermines Iraq's legal stance internationally.

Meanwhile, prominent figures like Wael Abdul Latif, a former judge and MP, have escalated criticism. 

Speaking to Rudaw on 21 April, he reiterated claims that the 2013 deal was unconstitutional and "humiliating", having been approved by only 80 MPs. He also accused Kuwait of seizing deep-water access and strategic territory, including parts of Umm Qasr, while Iraq was left with "shallow, useless waters".

Abdul Latif further alleged illegal land concessions and the loss of oil fields such as Zubair, Upper Sijil, and Safwan Dome, insisting the UN's Resolution 833—which formalised the border post-Gulf War—was beyond the Security Council's legal remit.

"Iraq's true border lies in Mutlaa," he said, referencing 1960s-era disputes. "We have the legal right to return to our original boundaries."

Abdul Latif cited Articles 49–53 of the Vienna Convention, under which a country can exit agreements that conflict with its domestic laws.

As the new hearing date nears, the Khor Abdullah case has become a flashpoint for constitutional interpretation, regional diplomacy, and questions of national sovereignty.