Shafaq News investigates: The stumbling of the tenth Iraqi government exposes a “structural crisis” that has persisted for years.
Shafaq News investigates: The stumbling of the tenth Iraqi government exposes a “structural crisis” that has persisted for years.
2026-04-07
Shafaq News – Baghdad
Iraq has been in a state of “blatant constitutional violation” for 69 days since the election of the President of the Republic, and then the appointment of the tenth Iraqi Prime Minister since 2003, amid political and popular aspirations awaiting the parliament session on April 11 (in 4 days), which is supposed to end this transgression that has lasted for about two and a half months.
This number represents the delay period after the end of the legal deadline, as the Iraqi constitution stipulates that the president of the republic must be elected within 30 days from the date of the first session of the new parliament.
The Iraqi parliament held its first session after the legislative elections that took place on November 11, 2025, on December 29, 2025.
If we calculate the entire period from the elections until today, 147 days have passed without the formation of a new government, reflecting the continued and recurring political stalemate that has become a hallmark of the Iraqi political process since 2003.
Political transformations after 2003
Since the US invasion of Iraq and the regime change in 2003, the process of forming a government has turned into a spiral of delays, power-sharing, and regional interference, as competing parties, sectarian and factional divisions, and the mixing of foreign interests have made Iraq a complex political arena subject to regional events.
Observers describe the current situation as among the most complicated since 2003, especially after exceeding constitutional deadlines, which delayed the appointment of the Prime Minister to form the government in accordance with Article 76 of the Iraqi Constitution.
In this context, political analyst Daoud Al-Halfi asserts: “From 2003 until today, governments have not been truly stable, except for the governments of 2006 and 2010,” referring to Nouri Al-Maliki’s first and second terms.
Al-Halfi explained this during his interview with Shafaq News Agency, saying that “all other governments were unstable for several reasons, including power-sharing, political blackmail, and the selection of weak figures who do not have the ability to manage the state according to the national identity.”
The outgoing government of Mohammed Shia al-Sudani is the ninth Iraqi government since the regime change, following a series of successive governments that began with the Governing Council government (2003) in a rotating format that included several figures.
This was followed by the interim government (2004) headed by Iyad Allawi, then the transitional government (2005) headed by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, and then the first constitutional government (2006) headed by Nouri al-Maliki, and the second constitutional government (2010) headed by Nouri al-Maliki (second term).
This was followed by the 2014 government headed by Haider al-Abadi, then the 2018 government headed by Adel Abdul Mahdi, then the 2020 government headed by Mustafa al-Kadhimi (a transitional government after Abdul Mahdi’s resignation), and finally the current 2022 government headed by Mohammed Shia al-Sudani.
Date of delay
The first permanent government was formed under Nouri al-Maliki in 2006, following the 2005 elections and a widespread boycott by a large segment of Iraqis. The period from the elections to the formation took about 5 months (156 days), due to sectarian tensions and the beginnings of the new political process.
As for Nouri al-Maliki’s second government (2010) after the elections of March 7, 2010, its formation took 289 days due to the crisis over the “largest bloc” between Allawi and al-Maliki, and it ended with the Erbil Agreement. It is considered the second longest period of political deadlock in the history of modern Iraq after the al-Sudani government.
The government of Haider al-Abadi (2014) was formed after the elections of April 30, 2014 on September 8, 2014, i.e. within 131 days, as international and religious pressure hastened the change of al-Maliki and the assignment of al-Abadi, which made the period relatively shorter compared to previous periods.
Internal reasons for the delay
Observers believe that Shiite and sectarian divisions are among the internal reasons for the delay in forming Iraqi governments. Ihsan al-Shammari, head of the Iraqi Center for Political Thought, says that “Shiite parties have always disagreed about who should assume the position of Prime Minister and the distribution of ministerial portfolios.”
Al-Shammari, speaking to Shafaq News Agency, points out that “the emergence of new political leaders has increased the complexity, because these leaders threaten the traditional leadership, which leads to circumventing the largest bloc even if it enjoys popularity.”
For his part, Aqeel al-Rudaini, spokesman for the Victory Coalition led by former Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, told Shafaq News Agency that “quotas and internal power struggles, in addition to the use of political money and influence among parties, all contributed to the delay in forming previous governments, along with the presence of weapons outside the authority of the state.”
For his part, political analyst Daoud Al-Halfi adds that “successive governments have not included strong national figures, but rather many weak figures, which has weakened the ability to make decisive decisions and create institutional stability.”
Regional and international influences
According to Ihsan al-Shammari and Aqil al-Rudaini, foreign interventions, especially between Washington and Tehran, played a major role in hindering the formation of the government.
In this regard, Al-Shammari believes that “regional interventions sometimes prevent the formation of the government or place a veto on a specific person, which affects granting confidence to the government.”
Al-Rudaini adds that “every nationality and political bloc has a regional influence, and this harms Iraq’s interests and increases internal divisions.”
Al-Halafi explains that the competition has become “based on supporting forces, not programs,” which diverts the focus from the national interest.
Regarding the impact of the political stalemate on the current situation, especially with regard to the economy and services, economist Nabil Al-Marsoumi, in an analysis published last Thursday, urged the swift formation of the next Iraqi government with full sovereign powers to meet the needs of citizens by preparing the current year’s budget.
According to Al-Marsoumi, the current House of Representatives has failed to approve the budget, which has exacerbated the economic and service crisis, and caused the country to face simultaneous financial and political bottlenecks.
The economist warns of an expected shortfall in salaries for the month of May amounting to five trillion dinars, as a result of declining oil sales and disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, stressing that “Iraq needs more than nine trillion dinars per month to cover salaries and social welfare, and any shortfall directly affects the lives of citizens.”
Record for delay
The Sudanese government (2022), which was formed after the elections of October 10, 2021 on October 27, 2022, holds the record for delay, as it took 382 days, due to a complete deadlock between the Sadrist movement and the coordination framework, which led to armed clashes and the withdrawal of the Sadrist movement from parliament.
Thus, the Sudanese government surpassed the record of the second Maliki government in 2010 by about 100 days, making it the longest government formation period in the history of modern Iraq.
Observers and legal experts attribute the continued constitutional violations to the fact that Article 70 stipulated the presence of two-thirds of the members of parliament, which made the “blocking third” a tool to obstruct the election of the president of the republic. Also, the quota system and the need to agree on the “single package” before any legislative step contributed to the delay.
Another reason is the absence of penalties, as the constitution does not specify the consequences of not electing a president within the specified period, which made the time limits indicative rather than binding, according to observers.
The largest block knot
Experts believe that since the 2010 elections, the Federal Court’s interpretation of the concept of “the largest parliamentary bloc” has caused repeated crises, as the interpretation considered the largest bloc to be the one formed within parliament, not the one that won the most seats in the elections.
The head of the Supreme Judicial Council in Iraq, Judge Faiq Zaidan, considered this interpretation to be full of constitutional flaws, explaining that the constitutional text defines the largest bloc as the actual winner, which affected confidence in constitutional legitimacy and led to repeated political crises.
This was also confirmed by Ihsan Al-Shammari, who pointed out that a big mistake was made in 2010 in interpreting the largest bloc, stressing the need to correct the decision issued by the Federal Court at that time.
Returning to Ihsan Al-Shammari’s statement, he emphasizes that if the political forces want to end the delay in forming the government, they must work on amending the internal regulations or even the constitution to avoid further delays.
In the latest attempt to break the deadlock, the Iraqi parliament’s presidency set April 11 as the new date for holding a session to elect the president, following escalating political pressure, supported by an official request submitted by about 220 MPs, indicating a growing desire within the legislative institution to end the state of paralysis that has persisted for 69 days.
shafaq.com
