Court rulings reviewed for possible legal changes

TDT | Manama
Email : editor@newsofbahrain.com

Any legal change must rest on solid groundwork, drawing on foreign examples without departing from Bahrain’s policy direction.
— H.E. Yusuf Khalaf, Minister for Legal Affairs and Acting Minister of Labour

Rulings from Bahrain’s top court are being reviewed to see whether the country’s laws need to be improved, the Minister for Legal Affairs and Acting Minister of Labour, His Excellency Yusuf Khalaf, has said.

He told Parliament that judgments from the Court of Cassation are closely followed by the government, especially when they expose gaps or inconsistencies in legislation.

He was replying to a question from MP Mohammed Al Ahmed, who asked how court decisions are taken into account when drafting new laws.

Khalaf made clear that the role of the judiciary is to apply the law to disputes brought before it.

Legal systems abroad

He added that while some legal systems abroad allow judges to call directly for changes to the law, this is not the case in Arab countries.

On how laws are developed, Khalaf said the Ministry of Legal Affairs works closely with the Legislation and Legal Opinion Commission.

Though the commission operates independently, the two bodies hold joint workshops and collaborate on legal training.

The two have different roles. The ministry conducts research, looks at international practices, and prepares early versions of draft laws.

Final wording

The commission is in charge of final wording, as well as drawing up regulations and government decisions.

Khalaf added that any legal change must rest on solid groundwork, drawing on foreign examples without departing from Bahrain’s policy direction.

He said an agreement had been signed with Saudi Arabia’s Bureau of Experts to share legal know-how and that talks with other governments and legal organisations are ongoing.

MP Mohammed Al Ahmed said the judiciary, despite being deeply involved in daily legal work, is far removed from shaping new laws.

He called for closer links between Parliament and the courts, arguing that the Supreme Judicial Council and serving judges are well placed to suggest changes based on real disputes.