Institutional bifurcation in the Libyan judiciary risks growing more deeply entrenched as a result of the escalating clash between Aguila Saleh, speaker of the eastern-based House of Representatives (HoR), and Chief Justice Abdullah Burziza, head of the Tripoli-based Supreme Court. This development further complicates the efforts of the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) to revive the long-stalled political settlement process. UNSMIL is trying to advance negotiations over a new roadmap aiming to steer the country back on course to presidential and parliamentary elections, which have been postponed since December 2021.
In July 2025, the HoR activated a previous law establishing a Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) in Benghazi. That law was simultaneously intended to demote the Tripoli-based Supreme Court to a Court of Cassation. However, the Tripoli-based court refused to recognise that move, declaring the HoR law unconstitutional. The HoR’s decision to staff the Benghazi SCC and put it into operation was a direct challenge to the judicial authority in Tripoli. Moreover, two bodies now claimed to be Libya’s top court. Tensions continued to escalate. On 28 December 2025, HoR Speaker Saleh called for the dismissal of Chief Justice Burziza who, he claimed, had become “a non-neutral opponent”. Saleh also called for the creation of “an independent court for the administrative judiciary,” signalling a determination to further sideline the “former Supreme Court”.
Burziza did not take long to respond. On 28 January 2026, the Constitutional Chamber of the Tripoli SCC issued a series of rulings that struck down five key laws passed by the HoR pertaining to the judicial structure, the reorganisation of the Supreme Judicial Council, and the 2022 law establishing the Benghazi SCC. The court also overturned the HoR’s general amnesty law and a law transferring the authority to issue the Official Gazette from the Ministry of Justice to the House of Representatives. Crucially, the Tripoli-based Supreme Court ruled that the UNSMIL-brokered Libyan Political Agreement (LPA) had constitutional force. In invalidating the HoR laws affecting the judiciary, the court reasoned that the HoR had failed to recognise the LPA, which was not referenced in the laws’ preambles. The court also argued that the HoR and the High Council of State (HCS) were temporary, de facto authorities and, as such, lacked the legal competence to amend the judicial system.
In its reasoning, the court affirmed three principles: first, “a ruling of unconstitutionality nullifies the law, extinguishes its existence, and erases its effects”; second, “the determination of who exercises judicial authority is a constitutional matter, not a legislative one”; and, third, “excluding members of the judiciary and the Supreme Court from the formation of the Supreme Judicial Council is unconstitutional.” The Tripoli-based court’s ruling aimed to overturn the entire restructuring of the judiciary the HoR introduced and to limit future legislative influence over the court system. However, it precipitated a rift within the judiciary, specifically between the Supreme Court, which stood at the pinnacle of the Libyan judiciary since the 1950s, and the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), which oversees the functioning of the judicial branch. This council is currently headed by Muftah Al-Qawi, who was appointed by Aguila Saleh in July 2022.
Since the Constitutional Chamber’s rulings, the SJC has cautioned against attempts to divide the judiciary. Such attempts are “motivated by political and personal ends” and are carried out through “tools framed as constitutional concerns.” Their intent is “to impose alternatives to the Supreme Judicial Council, thereby usurping its powers and threatening the unity of the judicial apparatus.” In a subsequent statement, the SJC rejected the Supreme Court’s rulings regarding the formation of that council. It further condemned attempts by the Tripoli-based court – which the SJC referred to as the “Court of Cassation” – to take over the council’s headquarters in Tripoli, with the support of the Justice Ministry and the interim Government of National Unity (GNU). The SJC, in its statement, urged its members to convene an urgent meeting to discuss the recent developments and their impact on the judicial landscape.
In an attempt to contain the rift, a group of legal experts formed a committee to mediate between the SJC and the Tripoli Supreme Court. The committee drew up a proposal calling for the suspension of the implementation of the court’s rulings and the creation of a committee to review the HoR’s judicial legislation. The court rejected the proposal. Meanwhile, Aguila Saleh appealed this court’s rulings to the Benghazi Constitutional Court, which promptly struck them down, further ratchetting up the tension between the two sides against the backdrop of the broader institutional divide between eastern and western Libya. The Tripoli-based High Council of State, siding with the Supreme Court, stated that the HoR’s acceptance and implementation of the court’s ruling were a condition for the resumption of negotiations over a new UN-sponsored roadmap. Some legal experts described the court’s invalidation of the HoR’s judicial legislation as “a step towards restoring balance between the branches of power and protecting judicial independence.” They stressed that the Supreme Court’s rulings are binding on all bodies and institutions.
In a comment on the crisis, former president of the Libyan Bar Association Mohamed Al-Alagi described the judiciary as having been “slaughtered by the legislative authority with the active participation of the judges themselves.” He added, “It seems that they see the judiciary as a function, as they have failed to grasp that the judiciary is one of three branches of power.”
Supporters of the House of Representatives’ position argue that, contrary to the Tripoli Supreme Court’s claim, national legislature does have the right to amend the judicial system law in accordance with the 2011 Constitutional Declaration. Individuals close to HoR Speaker Aguila Saleh hinted at possible escalatory steps, perhaps including the appointment of a new attorney general. Meanwhile, the HoR appears adamant in its refusal to recognise the legitimacy of the Tripoli-based Supreme Court’s rulings.
The UN Special Envoy for Libya Hanna Serwaa Tetteh, expressed her concerns regarding the escalating tensions in the Libyan judicial system. In a briefing to the UN Security Council last week, she urged Libyan leaders to refrain from further escalatory steps that threaten to fracture the judiciary. She also warned of the risks of “unexpected political and security challenges” due to the deteriorating economy, rising poverty, and a fragile security environment. “The main cause of this dysfunction is a divided government, with limited coordination and unilateral actions on both sides.”
* A version of this article appears in print in the 26 February, 2026 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: