Libya’s courts clash over constitutional authority

A dramatic legal standoff has erupted in Libya as competing courts challenge each other’s authority to rule on constitutional matters, highlighting the country’s ongoing institutional fragmentation, as reported by Libya Al-Ahrar.

The Supreme Constitutional Court in Benghazi delivered a striking verdict on February 15, declaring that the Supreme Court, based in Tripoli, lacks “the mandate to adjudicate constitutional cases” and therefore its recent rulings are themselves unconstitutional. The decision followed a lawsuit brought by House of Representatives Speaker Aguila Saleh.

This judicial tug-of-war reflects a deeper constitutional crisis that has simmered since December 2022. At that time, the House of Representatives established the Benghazi-based Constitutional Court, effectively stripping the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Chamber of its jurisdiction over constitutional disputes, the legislation also renamed the Supreme Court as the “Court of Cassation.”

Many would say that the establishment of the rival supreme court in Benghazi is an attempt by Libyan National Army leader, Khalifa Haftar, to bypass Libya’s Tripoli-based institutions in order to cement his authoritarian rule over Libya.

Last year the Benghazi court ruled to protect the House of Representatives’ endorsement of military promotions made by Khalifa Haftar, including those of his sons Saddam and Khaled, provoking strong opposition from the High Council of State in Tripoli, which labelled the decision as “an attack on judicial independence”, as reported by Ansharq Al-Awsat.

The latest dispute centres on four laws that the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Chamber invalidated in late January 2025. These included Law No. 22 of 2023, Law No. 32 of 2023, Law No. 6 of 2015 concerning amnesty, and Law No. 1 which repealed legislation from the General National Congress era.

The contested Law No. 1, enacted on 15 January 2020, declared all General National Congress laws and decisions “cancelled” after 3 August 2014 – the date marking the House of Representatives’ first session. However, it preserved pre-August 2014 legislation until formally amended or repealed.

Libya’s eastern and western administrations have publicly clashed over legal authority on many occasions. In July 2025 the eastern Libyan government rejected the authority of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over alleged crimes in Libya from 2011 to 2027, challenging a separate declaration by the Tripoli-based Government of National Unity that had accepted ICC jurisdiction under the Rome Statute.

The eastern administration argued that the GNU’s move lacked constitutional legitimacy and violated Libya’s sovereignty, even as the ICC maintained it had jurisdiction to investigate serious crimes committed during and after the 2011 uprising.

Although this was not a dispute over constitutional matters, it demonstrates the political and institutional divide over legal authority between Libya’s east and west.

The escalating conflict pits the Supreme Court against both the Supreme Judicial Council and the House of Representatives, reigniting long-standing debates about the separation of powers between Libya’s eastern and western based legislative and judicial branches.

Libya’s fractured judicial system now faces fundamental questions about which institution holds legitimate authority to interpret the country’s constitutional framework.

Libya Al-Ahrar, Ansharq Al-Awsat, Maghrebi.org