This study examines the overlooked role of executive procedures in post-conflict contexts—specifically Iraq—in establishing procedural foundations that either facilitate or impede sustainable peace. The research aims to contribute to both theoretical discourse and the formulation of actionable policy recommendations for the executive authority in its peacebuilding efforts. The central hypothesis posits that the effectiveness of the Iraqi executive authority in peacebuilding is undermined by an ambiguous understanding of the legal weight of its obligations in this domain. Consequently, the prioritization of peace-related initiatives has been inconsistent and often ineffective. Merely adopting measures and asserting their relevance to peacebuilding is insufficient without a clear legal and normative framework. Accordingly, this study seeks to address the following following core question: To what extent do the actions of the Iraqi executive authority possess legal validity in the context of peacebuilding, and how do these actions align with both domestic and international legal standards?
Oday Mahmood (Mon,) studied this question.