This article critically assesses whether the Supreme Council fully performs the functions generally associated with a supreme court. It reviews the Council’s historical development and the expansion of its competences across civil, criminal, and administrative matters, emphasizing the tension between legality control and broader expectations of guidance. The study highlights structural constraints such as caseload pressure, procedural design, and limited research and documentation support, which can affect the quality and consistency of decisions. It concludes with reform‑oriented proposals to strengthen the Council’s capacity to unify jurisprudence and to improve efficiency without undermining procedural guarantees.
Mohamed El Wakili (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: