Welcome to the new Iran, pronounced Iraq.
The Iraqi Mullahs of Sistani will compose the mysterious "Supreme Judiciary Council" that is supposed to nominate the members of the supreme court, according to article 89. The constitution does not say how this supreme judiciary council is selected, how many members it has, or how long they will serve. It isn't even clear why such a court needs to exist — is this a council of guardians in disguise, accountable to no one, but able to control the laws of land?
Article (89): The Supreme Judiciary Council will exercise the following powers:
1st - administering and supervising the federal judiciary system.
2nd - nominating the head and members of the Supreme Federal Court and
presenting their names to parliament for endorsement.
3rd - nominating the head of the Federal Cassation Court, the chief
prosecutor and the head of the Judiciary Inspection Department, and
presenting them to parliament for approval.
4th - proposing the annual budget for the federal judiciary system and
presenting it to parliament for approval.
The Prime Minister of Iraq is going to implement Sharia Law:
....Iraq's Prime Minister is Ibrahim al-Jaafari....
Asked if his government would institute Islamic Shari'a law, al-Jaafari replied: "Yes … that is only natural in a country that is populated mainly by Muslims."
"This is a new chapter in relations with Iraq," enthused Iranian Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref during al-Jaafari's visit. Agha Panayi, an Iranian intelligence official, has offered a similarly enthusiastic assessment: "Throughout Iraq, the people we supported are in power."
This is not what we are fighting for. It is the opposite. They may have to rename this Operation Islamic Slavery.
Hopefully the constitution will not pass and we will have more time to change this into a real constitution of real freedom instead of an Islamist Shiite Sharia Iranian type government.
Instead of fighting like WW2 we are fighting our enemies war. Iran must be smiling to see U.S. troops fighting to support a constitution that states "No Law shall Contradict Islam." If we allow this Islamist Constitution we will just have to come back and fight Iran AND Iraq later. Better to take Iran out now and with that show the moslems that their god is a worthless piece of dead nothing.
No blood for Islam. Take Iran and Syria out NOW.
............................. So that is the starting point for my comments.
So I have made an attempt to understand what you shared. As you indicate, it would be difficult at best or dis-honest to try to argue that Iraq will not be governed by some form of Sharia law. The tenets (fundamental principals) of Islam will be the underlining factor on what is acceptable as law(s), e.g. entered into some written form to guide the Federal Courts as how they should interprete the law etc..
Clearly they willingly set themselves up for latter confrontations between how the Supreme Federal Court under the guidance of the Supreme Judiciary Council will be able to conjugate difference in Sharia and civil liberties mentioned elsewhere in this body of text, such as the freedom for all Iraqi Citizens to freely be able to practice their particular religious faith, as outlined in Article (40).
But, if the guarantee set forth in Article (40) is binding, that is, cannot be overruled nor denied to any individual regardless of what Sharia law may dictate, then there appears to be a check and balance system. I would extend this example to all other listed personal freedoms declared in the document. Perhaps the written guarantees will side line any Sharia based laws that would negate the value of what is written in the Constitution regarding personal freedoms.
That is just my personal opinion being a laymen regarding systems of law.
However, as you indicate, clearly this Supreme Judiciary Council is going to operate to guide the Federal Courts in how law is to be interpreted. And in so doing will perhaps totally hamper any forward looking ideas the Presidential Council (executive branch)and the Council of Representatives (legislator) may feel have a chance of becoming law.
So it would appear this is all a crap shoot so to speak.
Or we just do not have a feel as how this Supreme Judiciary Council will subordinate the will of the majority of people, e.g. laws progressive legislators would like to see established. Which could include more basic rights for women for instance.