The penal role of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq Integrity Commission in combating corruption crimes in the region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crime of corruption represents a great danger to the state, and is very contrary to the standards of integrity, and constitutes a major obstacle to economic development plans, as corruption crimes have recently spread throughout the world significantly, especially in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region, which called for each of them to establish a special body to combat corruption crimes in them after the collapse of the former regime in 2003. The work of the Integrity Commission in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region as an anti-corruption body is a relatively new experience. With the development of the issue of corruption in the Kurdistan Region, the legislator decided to issue the Law of the Integrity Commission for the Kurdistan Region No. (3) of 2011, which referred in its second article to the establishment of a commission in the name of (Commission of Integrity for the Kurdistan Region - Iraq). Its main mission is to combat corruption crime in the region. The research came to show the penal role of the Kurdistan Region Integrity Commission in reducing corruption crimes that are rampant in the region, as well as revealing the shortcomings and legislative shortcomings that surrounded the legislation regulating the work of the Regional Integrity Commission in order to activate it more effectively. The research reached a number of results, including: The law granted the Authority - as a competent authority to combat corruption crimes - some legal procedures to play a major role in combating these crimes in particular, the most important of which is the possibility of initiating the criminal case through its legal representative, as well as receiving (information) complaint and information in order to investigate them, where the Authority investigates two types of lawsuits: The first are news cases that have not yet been brought before the judiciary, and the second are criminal cases that have been brought before the investigative court judge upon receiving a complaint or informing about corruption. The Commission, through its legal representative, can appeal the decisions of the investigating judge and the Court of First Instance, as according to the data obtained by the researchers, the Commission has carried out its tasks effectively in the field of appealing the decisions to suspend execution within the scope of corruption crimes. The research recommended a number of suggestions, the most important of which are: the need to add a text to the law of the Regional Integrity Commission in which it explicitly stipulates that the Commission must initiate a criminal case as soon as it learns of the crime of corruption, and that the system does not include the suspension of the execution of punishment for perpetrators of corruption crimes. Keywords:Kurdistan Region Integrity Commission, initiating criminal cases, receiving information and complaints, investigation, news lawsuit and criminal lawsuit, appeal. Download Statistics Article view 1 Downloads 0 First online 15 December 2024 Published at 15 December 2024 How to cite RIS EndNote HARVARD Mendeley BibTeX APA MLA VANCOUVER Share logo Journal of Legal and Political Studies Quick li
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".