The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 2 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
الضوابط القانونية للقرار الإداري الصادر عن الذكاء الاصطناعي: دراسة تحليلية في ضوء التشريع العراقي
Open accessAbstract
في ظل التطور المتسارع لتطبيقات الذكاء الاصطناعي، يتناول هذا البحث بالتحليل المعمق الضوابط القانونية اللازمة لتنظيم القرار الإداري الصادر عن الأنظمة الذكية، مسلطًا الضوء على الفراغ التشريعي الكبير في النظام القانوني العراقي. تنبع أهمية الدراسة من الحاجة الماسة لمواكبة التحولات الرقمية في الإدارة العامة، وما تفرزه من تحديات جوهرية تمس مشروعية القرارات المؤتمتة، وصعوبة تحديد المسؤولية القانونية عن أخطائها، وضمان الحقوق الأساسية للأفراد في مواجهتها. يهدف البحث إلى تحليل قصور التشريعات العراقية الحالية، وتحديد الإشكاليات العملية المترتبة على استخدام الذكاء الاصطناعي، واقتراح إطار قانوني متكامل. ولتحقيق هذه الأهداف، يعتمد البحث على المنهج التحليلي للنصوص القانونية العراقية ذات الصلة، والمنهج المقارن للاستفادة من التجارب الدولية الرائدة، كتجربة الاتحاد الأوروبي في لائحة الذكاء الاصطناعي واللائحة العامة لحماية البيانات (GDPR). وقد خلص البحث إلى أن المنظومة التشريعية العراقية، بما فيها قانون التوقيع الإلكتروني، غير مهيأة للتعامل مع الطبيعة الخاصة للقرار الخوارزمي، مما يخلق حالة من عدم اليقين القانوني ويهدد مبادئ الشفافية والمساءلة والرقابة القضائية. وبناءً على ذلك، توصي الباحثة بضرورة تدخل المشرع العراقي من خلال سن قانون خاص ينظم استخدام الذكاء الاصطناعي في العمل الإداري، مع تبني مفهوم "السجل الإجرائي الرقمي" كأداة لضمان الرقابة الفعالة، وتكريس حقوق الأفراد في المعرفة، والتفسير، والمراجعة البشرية، كأساس لبناء الثقة في الإدارة الرقمية.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This analytical study examines the legal framework needed to govern administrative decisions issued by artificial intelligence systems under Iraqi law, arguing that Iraq's current legislation contains a significant gap. It recommends that the Iraqi legislature enact a dedicated AI law and adopt a "digital procedural record" to secure oversight and individual rights.
Key findings
- The Iraqi legislative system, including the Electronic Signature and Electronic Transactions Law No. 78 of 2012, "remains ill-equipped to address the distinctive nature of algorithmic decision-making."
- This legal uncertainty "undermines principles of transparency, accountability, and judicial oversight."
- The study recommends enacting a dedicated law to regulate the use of AI in administrative functions.
- It advocates a "digital procedural record" as a mechanism to ensure effective oversight and safeguard individuals' rights to information, explanation, and human review, "thus fostering trust in digital governance."
Methods
- Design: an analytical approach to relevant Iraqi legal texts combined with a comparative methodology drawing on leading international experiences, "particularly the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)."
- Data/sample: Iraqi legal texts cited include the Electronic Signature and Electronic Transactions Law No. 78 of 2012, Civil Service Law No. 24 of 1960, State Council Law No. 65 of 1979, Discipline of State and Public Sector Employees Law No. 14 of 1991, and the 2005 Constitution; comparative reference is also made to the UAE Personal Data Protection Law No. 45 of 2021.
- Main analysis: examination of shortcomings in current Iraqi legislation, identification of practical issues arising from AI use in administrative decision-making, and proposal of a comprehensive legal framework.
Limitations
- Not stated in the paper (the abstract and available text do not articulate explicit limitations of the study).
- Evident from the text: the full body of the article is presented as heavily corrupted OCR of Arabic script, so the substantive argumentation, case analysis, and any empirical claims beyond the English abstract cannot be reliably verified from the provided text.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
2 Sources not found · 1 Own interpretation · 1 No basis given
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The findings indicate that the Iraqi legislative system, including the Electronic Signature Law, remains ill-equipped to address the distinctive nature of algorithmic decision-making.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“with a particular focus on the significant legislative gap within the Iraqi legal system”
§ Legal Framework Governing AI-Based Administrative Decisions: An Analytical Study in Light of Iraqi Legislation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This legal uncertainty undermines principles of transparency, accountability, and judicial oversight.”
§ Legal Framework Governing AI-Based Administrative Decisions: An Analytical Study in Light of Iraqi Legislation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 2
- It may state two separate claims as one. 1
In the paper
“EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data, and Repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), Pub.L. No. L 119, 1 (2016).”
§ Legal Framework Governing AI-Based Administrative Decisions: An Analytical Study in Light of Iraqi Legislation > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites GDPR
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“art.12 البيانات دقة في الطعن في الحق : ً ثالثا”
§ Legal Framework Governing AI-Based Administrative Decisions: An Analytical Study in Light of Iraqi Legislation > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites GDPR
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
Digital transformation in public administration is underway and generates fundamental challenges concerning the legality of automated decisions, legal accountability for their errors, and the protection of individuals' fundamental rights.
“The importance of this research stems from the urgent need to keep pace with digital transformation in public administration, which brings forth fundamental challenges related to the legality of automated decisions, the ambiguity of legal accountability for their errors, and the protection of individuals' fundamental rights in confronting such decisions.”
Citations
Cites
التحول الرقمي و تأثيره على الاداء العالي لمنظمات القطاع العام في العراق
الأسدي, ز. ك. ج., & الغزالي, ف. ر. غ. (2024) · Al-Ghary Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences · doi:10.36325/ghjec.v20i00.17024 · Cited by 4
الجوانب القانونية للذكاء الاصطناعي
سالم, ك. ع. (2022) · مجلة جيل الأبحاث القانونية المعمقة · doi:10.33685/1545-000-054-003 · Cited by 1
Ahmed, A., & Rasool, F. (2024) · Journal for Political and Security Studies · doi:10.31271/10099
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- Discipline of State and Public Sector Employees Law No. 14 of 1991. Electronic Signature and Electronic Transactions Law No. 78 of 2012.
- Al-Helou, M. R. (2004). Principles of administrative law (Vol. 1). Beirut: Al-Halabi Legal Publications.
- Al-Tamawi, S. M. (1984). The general theory of administrative decisions: A comparative study (Vol. 1). Cairo: Dar Al-Fikr Al-Arabi.
- Basyuni, A. G. (1991). Administrative law (Vol. 1). Alexandria: Al-Ma'aref Publishing.
- Shatnawi, A. K. (2003). Concise administrative law. Jordan: Dar Wael for Publishing and Distribution. Research Articles Abdul, W. R., & Abdul, R. R. (2025). The impact of modern technology in improving administrative performance and developing laws in Iraqi universities. College of Kut University Journal of Humanities, Special Issue on the Proceedings of the Third Conference of the College of Law, University of Wasit, 417-427.
- Abu Mughli, M. (2019). The legality of the administrative decision in Jordanian legislation: A comparative study. Journal of Law, 43 ( 4 .
- Al-Amili, S. S. (2012). The position of the administrative judiciary regarding the defect of jurisdiction in the administrative decision. College of Education Journal -University of Wasit ( , 44 .
- Al-Fatlawi, A. K. H. (2021). The evidentiary authority of the administrative decision: A comparative study. Al-Muhaqqiq Al-Hilli Journal for Legal and Political Sciences, 13(1), 635-671.
- Al-Jubouri, Y. M. A. (2020). The evidentiary authority of electronic signature: A comparative study. College of Law Journal for Legal and Political Sciences, 9 ( 34 .
- Al-Shammari, A. A. Z. (2024). Provisions of the electronic administrative decision: A comparative study. Misan Journal for Comparative Legal Studies, 1(10), 316-369.
- Al-Shammari, H. J., & Al-Saidi, A. R. J. (2021). Requirements for implementing e-governance in Iraq: An exploratory study of the views of a sample of managers and employees at the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 27(126), 206-223.
- Al-Shukri, A. Y., & Abdul-Kadhim, M. S. (2015). The administration's authority in supervising the implementation of the administrative contract. Kufa Journal of Legal and Political Sciences, 7 ( 44 .
- Amer, H. A. (2019). The electronic administrative decision in the jurisprudence and rulings of the Egyptian State Council. Journal of Legal and Economic Research ( , 43 .)
- Kazem, F. A., & Ne'mah, A. A. H. (2024). The impact of digital transformation on enhancing operational efficiency: An exploratory study of a sample of employees at Karbala Governorate Office. Iraqi Journal of Administrative Sciences, 20 (
- Mahmoud, R. Q. (2024). Civil liability arising from smart contracts in light of the Iraqi Electronic Transactions Law. Iraqi University Journal, 62(2), 479-490.
- Morsi, H. M. (2018). Controls of the administrative decision. Journal of Law for Legal and Economic Research, 1(1-A), 122-212.
- Nassar, M. Y. A. (2023). Legal liability of artificial intelligence. The Legal Journal, 17(7), 1489-1512. https://jlaw.journals.ekb.eg/article_313292.html
- Ne'mah, N. H. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence on achieving sustainable development. Journal of Economic and Financial Studies, 5 ( 6 .)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
ijlessjournal (2026) · مجلة القانون والأعمال الدولية · doi:10.63585/ozsp2793 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- عبد, م. د. ر. ر.
- Affiliations
- University of Wasit (IQ)
- Corresponding author
- م.د. رؤى رزاق عبد
- Venue
- مجلة اشور للعلوم القانونية و السياسية تصدر عن الجمعية العراقية للعلوم القانونية
- Publisher
- Iraqi Association for Legal Sciences
- Published
- 2025-09-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 436-469
- ISSN
- 3005-3269 (ISSN-L)
- 3005-530X
- OpenAlex
- W4413892675
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 2.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- ar
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- مجلة اشور للعلوم القانونية و السياسية تصدر عن الجمعية العراقية للعلوم القانونية (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Law › Administrative Law and Governance
- Social Sciences › Law › Artificial Intelligence in Law
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, administrative decisions, algorithmic decision-making, AI regulation, Iraqi law, electronic signature law, GDPR, legal certainty, transparency, accountability, judicial review, legal liability, human review, digitalization of public administration
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: الضوابط القانونية للقرار الإداري الصادر عن الذكاء الاصطناعي: دراسة تحليلية في ضوء التشريع العراقي. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.64184/ajlps.v2.i3.y2025.p436-469.137
- The paper
- عبد, م. د. ر. ر. (2025). الضوابط القانونية للقرار الإداري الصادر عن الذكاء الاصطناعي: دراسة تحليلية في ضوء التشريع العراقي. مجلة اشور للعلوم القانونية و السياسية تصدر عن الجمعية العراقية للعلوم القانونية. https://doi.org/10.64184/ajlps.v2.i3.y2025.p436-469.137
