تنازع الاختصاص بين القضاء العسكري والقضاء العدلي
Date
2025-01-28
Authors
مرام إياد إسماعيل أبوحميد
Maram Iyad Ismail Abu Hmaid
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Al-Quds University
Abstract
إن وجود محكمة تختص بالنزاع بين الجهات القضائية أمر ينهي النزاع بشكل أبدي خاصة أن الجهات القضائية تتداخل فيما بينها بموضوع الاختصاص سواء كان التنازع سلبي باختصاص كلا الجهات أو تنازع إيجابي بعدم اختصاصها وأيضاً قرار المحكمة ينهي الامر بموضوع القوانين والنصوص التي ممكن أن تتشابه بالاختصاص مما يشكل النزاع بين القوانين وهذا بدوره يشكل عرقلة في سير العدالة لأنه من الصعب تنفيذ قرار دون الآخر.
وتجسد ذلك في تعدد القوانين التي تنص على بعض المواضيع التي تشكل نزاع بين الجهات مما جعل المشرع يتصور أنه غير كافي تحديد اختصاص المحكمة في كل جهة وتوقع حدوث نزاع فعلي بين هذه الجهات مما يفرض التساؤل التالي: ما هو الأسلوب القانوني الذي إتبعه المشرع الفلسطيني لحل التنازع بين القضاء العسكري والقضاء العدلي في ظل تداخل إختصاص كل محكمة تجاه الأخرى وتنوع القوانين ؟
تهدف هذه الدراسة لإبراز المحكمة المختصة التي تتمتع بالاستقلالية من ناحية الاختصاص والنظام الذي تتبعه لحل النزاع القائم بين الجهات القضائية وهي المحكمة الدستورية العليا وذلك عبر بيان المنهج المقارن بين الجهات، حيث تتبع في الإجراءات عند تقديم طلب تعيين المرجع وتحديد المختصة قانون أصول المحاكمات المدنية والتجارية رقم (3) لسنة (2001) بما لا يخالف طبيعة وتنظيم المحكمة الدستورية العليا وبما لا يتعارض مع الإجراءات المنصوص عليها في قانون المحكمة الدستورية العليا رقم (3) لسنة (2006).
فعند تقديم طلب تعيين مرجع لتحديد المحكمة المختصة بنظر الدعوى الجزائية المتنازع عليها في حالة التنازع الإيجابي يتم وقف الدعاوى لحين البت بالطلب الماثل أمام المحكمة الدستورية العليا، أما في حالة التنازع السلبي فلا تكون الدعوى قائمة أساساً حتى يوقف سير الدعوى بها، في حين أن تقديم طلب لرفع التنازع بين حكم عدلي وحكم عسكري جزائيين متناقضين فيجوز لرئيس المحكمة الدستورية العليا وقف الحكمين أو إحداهما لحين البت بالطلب.
ولذلك انقسمت هذه الدراسة الى فصلين حمل الفصل الأول قيام تنازع الاختصاص بين القضاء العسكري والقضاء العدلي وقد انقسم هذا الفصل الى مبحثين، حمل المبحث الأول الى طبيعة هذا التنازع في حين حمل المبحث الثاني لمظاهر هذا التنازع.
وقد تطرق الفصل الثاني لأحكام رفع تنازع الاختصاص، فقد عالج المبحث الأول حالات تنازع الاختصاص بين الجهات في حين تناول المبحث الثاني لآثار حل التنازع بين الجهات القضائية. وقد تم التوصل في نهاية هذه الدراسة الى مجموعة نتائج منها التزام الجهات القضائية بالمحكمة التي حددتها المحكمة الدستورية بالاختصاص كون أن قرار المحكمة ملزم للكافة .
The existence of a court that specializes in the dispute between the judicial authorities ends the dispute eternally, especially since the judicial authorities overlap among themselves on the subject of jurisdiction, whether the conflict is negative in the jurisdiction of both parties or a positive conflict of lack of jurisdiction, and also the court's decision ends the matter with the subject of laws and texts that may be similar to jurisdiction, which constitutes a conflict between laws, and this in turn constitutes an obstruction in the course of justice because it is difficult to implement one decision without the other. This was embodied in the multiplicity of laws that stipulate some topics that constitute a dispute between the parties, which made the legislator imagine that it is not enough to determine the jurisdiction of the court in each side and to expect an actual dispute between these parties, which imposes the following question: What is the legal method followed by the Palestinian legislator to resolve the conflict between the military judiciary and the judicial judiciary in light of the overlap of jurisdiction of each court towards the other and the diversity of laws? This study aims to highlight the competent court that enjoys independence in terms of jurisdiction and the system it follows to resolve the dispute between the judicial authorities, namely the Supreme Constitutional Court, through a statement of the comparative approach between the authorities, where it follows in the procedures when submitting a request for appointment of the reference and determine the competent Civil and Commercial Procedure Law No. (3) of (2001) in a manner that does not contradict the nature and organization of the Supreme Constitutional Court and does not conflict with the procedures stipulated in the Supreme Constitutional Court Law No. (3) of(2006). When a request is submitted for the appointment of a reference to determine the court competent to hear the disputed criminal case in the event of a positive dispute, the cases are suspended until the present application before the Supreme Constitutional Court is decided, but in the case of negative conflict, the case does not exist in the first place until the case is suspended, while if a request is submitted to lift the conflict between a judicial judgment and a military penal judgment that are contradictory, the President of the Supreme Constitutional Court may suspend the two judgments or one of them until the request is decided. Therefore, this study was divided into two chapters carried the first chapter of the conflict of jurisdiction between the military judiciary and the judicial judiciary has divided this chapter into two sections, carried the first section to the nature of this conflict while carrying the second section of the manifestations of this conflict.
The existence of a court that specializes in the dispute between the judicial authorities ends the dispute eternally, especially since the judicial authorities overlap among themselves on the subject of jurisdiction, whether the conflict is negative in the jurisdiction of both parties or a positive conflict of lack of jurisdiction, and also the court's decision ends the matter with the subject of laws and texts that may be similar to jurisdiction, which constitutes a conflict between laws, and this in turn constitutes an obstruction in the course of justice because it is difficult to implement one decision without the other. This was embodied in the multiplicity of laws that stipulate some topics that constitute a dispute between the parties, which made the legislator imagine that it is not enough to determine the jurisdiction of the court in each side and to expect an actual dispute between these parties, which imposes the following question: What is the legal method followed by the Palestinian legislator to resolve the conflict between the military judiciary and the judicial judiciary in light of the overlap of jurisdiction of each court towards the other and the diversity of laws? This study aims to highlight the competent court that enjoys independence in terms of jurisdiction and the system it follows to resolve the dispute between the judicial authorities, namely the Supreme Constitutional Court, through a statement of the comparative approach between the authorities, where it follows in the procedures when submitting a request for appointment of the reference and determine the competent Civil and Commercial Procedure Law No. (3) of (2001) in a manner that does not contradict the nature and organization of the Supreme Constitutional Court and does not conflict with the procedures stipulated in the Supreme Constitutional Court Law No. (3) of(2006). When a request is submitted for the appointment of a reference to determine the court competent to hear the disputed criminal case in the event of a positive dispute, the cases are suspended until the present application before the Supreme Constitutional Court is decided, but in the case of negative conflict, the case does not exist in the first place until the case is suspended, while if a request is submitted to lift the conflict between a judicial judgment and a military penal judgment that are contradictory, the President of the Supreme Constitutional Court may suspend the two judgments or one of them until the request is decided. Therefore, this study was divided into two chapters carried the first chapter of the conflict of jurisdiction between the military judiciary and the judicial judiciary has divided this chapter into two sections, carried the first section to the nature of this conflict while carrying the second section of the manifestations of this conflict.
Description
Keywords
Citation
أبوحميد، مرام إياد. (2025). تنازع الاختصاص بين القضاء العسكري والقضاء العدلي [رسالة ماجستير غير منشورة]. جامعة القدس.