Mohammad Shia al-Sudani Government: extension tests constitutional limits
Shafaq News
The debate over extending Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani’s caretaker government reflects a political effort to manage prolonged deadlock, but it simultaneously tests the constitutional limits of executive authority and the durability of Iraq’s parliamentary system.
With parliament failing in two consecutive sessions on January 29 and February 1 to elect a president —a prerequisite for nominating a new prime minister —political actors have begun floating a temporary extension of al-Sudani’s government as a practical exit from paralysis. Yet what appears as a political workaround quickly transforms into a constitutional dilemma: can a caretaker administration continue by political agreement, or does such a move stretch Iraq’s legal framework beyond its intended limits?
Deadlock as Catalyst
The extension proposal emerged after repeated failures to complete the constitutional sequence required to form a new government. A source within the Coordination Framework told Shafaq News that al-Sudani received a proposal to extend his caretaker administration for one year with limited powers, pending broader political settlement.
The initiative comes amid fears of repeating past formation crises. Iraq’s current government itself was born after nearly 12 months of stalemate following the October 2021 elections —the longest post-2003 impasse. Earlier, Mustafa al-Kadhimi’s cabinet took roughly six months to materialize after the resignation of Adel Abdul-Mahdi in 2019.
These precedents reinforce a structural pattern: Iraq’s parliamentary system ensures continuity through caretaker governance, but struggles to guarantee timely political agreement.
Constitutional Framework
Under Article 78 of Iraq’s 2005 Constitution, the prime minister is the direct executive authority responsible for general state policy. Article 80 grants the Council of Ministers authority to implement policy, issue regulations, and supervise executive functions.
In ordinary circumstances, these provisions allow wide strategic discretion. However, full executive powers presuppose active parliamentary legitimacy.
The Federal Supreme Court’s interpretation on November 17, 2025, reshaped that equation. The Court ruled that election day (November 11, 2025) marks the end of the previous parliamentary term, effectively transitioning the executive branch into a continuity phase with limited authority until a new government secures parliamentary confidence.
Although the Constitution mentions “caretaker government” only in Articles 61 and 64, Iraqi constitutional practice since 2005 has established the concept as a mechanism of necessity. Crucially, neither the Constitution, nor the Council of Ministers’ internal regulations, nor Federal Court Decision No. 213 of 2025 set a defined time limit for this status.
This absence of a temporal ceiling lies at the heart of the current controversy.
Read more: Nouri Al-Maliki’s return rekindles Iraq’s divisions as Iran and the US pull apart
What Caretaker Governance Allows — and Restricts
Legal consensus holds that a caretaker government may manage daily affairs, disburse salaries, and respond to urgent security or service-related needs. It must, however, avoid long-term commitments, major international agreements, structural appointments, or transformative policy decisions.
Extension, therefore, does not grant new authority. At most, it prolongs a restricted mandate.
Legal Objections: No Constitutional Basis for Extension
Legal expert Salem Hawas told Shafaq News that “the Constitution is entirely devoid of any text permitting the extension of a caretaker government.” He emphasized that such a government is “temporary and constrained by necessity,” and that its continuation is “strictly tied to completing constitutional entitlements, not political bargains.”
Hawas added that parliament cannot extend executive authority beyond constitutional mandates, describing such a move as an indirect constitutional amendment. “The Federal Supreme Court’s role is interpretative and supervisory, not creative,” he said. “It cannot generate a new mandate.”
In this reading, Hawas pointed out that the extension merely institutionalizes limitation but does not resolve deadlock.
Political Calculus Inside the Shiite Camp
The proposal also reflects shifting dynamics within the Shiite-led Coordination Framework. Former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki remains a potential candidate for the premiership, but his return faces both domestic resistance and international scrutiny.
US President Donald Trump previously signaled that Washington could reconsider aspects of its support for Iraq should al-Maliki return to office. Bloomberg reported that US officials warned Iraqi counterparts of potential restrictions on Baghdad’s access to oil revenues in such a scenario.
These signals complicate internal negotiations and elevate al-Sudani’s profile in two distinct ways: either as a comparatively less polarizing alternative to al-Maliki, or as a pragmatic option to remain in office for a limited one-year period under caretaker status should political forces fail to agree on a successor.
Al-Sudani himself secured more than 92,000 personal votes in the October 2025 elections, while his coalition secured 46 seats, placing his coalition first in the parliamentary elections with over 400,000 total votes. He subsequently relinquished his parliamentary seat, a move that could be interpreted as positioning himself for executive continuity if extension materializes.
Whether that interpretation holds or not, the political logic is evident: in the absence of consensus on a successor, continuity becomes an option, albeit a constrained one.
Institutional Continuity vs Democratic Rotation
Iraq’s parliamentary system centers authority in the legislature, which grants confidence to the executive. The lifespan of a caretaker government ultimately hinges on the president’s tasking of the largest parliamentary bloc to form a cabinet.
Until that process concludes, governance operates under necessity rather than full mandate.
The extension debate thus raises a broader institutional question: can constitutional flexibility absorb political paralysis without eroding the principle of power rotation?
For now, al-Sudani’s government continues to function under caretaker limits, managing state affairs while negotiations unfold. Yet the longer the transition persists, the sharper the tension between political expediency and constitutional integrity becomes.
What is at stake now is the boundaries of executive authority in moments of prolonged impasse, and whether temporary necessity risks becoming normalized governance.
Read more: Iraq slips into constitutional vacuum as presidential deadlock drags on
Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.
