On Aug. 26, the Iraqi judiciary resolved a six-month controversy concerning a law passed to limit the terms of the president, prime minister and parliament speaker in an attempt to prevent current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki from running for another term. The Federal Supreme Court, the body authorized to interpret the constitution, declared the law unconstitutional, landing a severe blow to Maliki's opponents, who had failed in June to round up enough votes for a parliamentary vote of no confidence.

Although the controversial law targeted the speaker and president as well, the law was clearly aimed at the prime minister. Passed in January, it stipulated that “for the purposes of the implementation of the law's provisions, a full term is one that ends upon exemption, resignation, withdrawal of confidence or upon the dissolution of parliament.” The text clearly showed that Maliki's opponents had personalized it, which prompted its referral to the Federal Supreme Court a few days after it was passed.

Some observers believe that Maliki heeded, at least in part, the advice of close associates who urged him to postpone the appeal against the term limits law and pave the way for compromise and resolution by reconciling with Iraqi Kurds, considered to be his fiercest opponents. Indeed, Maliki broke the ice with them in June and restored relations, which had been strained to the point of deploying tanks and soldiers on the border of the Kurdish region in late 2012.

The reconciliation took on broader implications when the federal court, one day before its decision on the term mandates, abolished an article providing for normalization with the Kurds and scrutinizing voter registrations as a precondition for local and legislative elections in Kirkuk province, which the Kurds are demanding be annexed to their region.