Skip to content
POL-30

This is a proposal for discussion, not an enacted law.

Ali Zuweid's Political Programme · Legislative Proposal · Security, Defence and Sovereignty

Border Security, Ports of Entry and Integrated Border Management Law

A federal framework that unifies responsibility for sovereignty along the border with management of official ports of entry, clearly separates border security command, customs, passport control and technical inspection, and then integrates their operations through joint on-site command, shared data and risk management, making borders more secure without treating every traveller or legitimate shipment as a suspected threat.

Document number
POL-30
Version
1.0
Publication / last updated
7 October 2026
Scope
Republic of Iraq — Federal

Executive Summary

The Constitution gives the federal authorities exclusive responsibility for national security policy, including establishing and managing armed forces to protect Iraq's borders. It also assigns customs policy, foreign trade policy, and the regulation of nationality and residence to the federal authorities. In practice, however, the border operates through several parallel institutions: the Border Forces Command protects the borderline and crossing routes; the Border Ports Authority, attached to the Council of Ministers, supervises and coordinates activity within ports of entry; and customs, passport control, health, agricultural, transport and security bodies each operate within their respective mandates.

The problem is not the absence of institutions, but the absence of a comprehensive law connecting the borderline, theofficial port of entry, andcrossing data within a single system. Border Ports Authority Law No. (30) of 2016 addressed unified administration and supervision at ports of entry, but was not designed as a comprehensive border security law. The technological environment has also developed since then, with national customs and digital systems. This draft therefore proposes repealing Law No. (30) of 2016 and replacing it with a broader law, while retaining the Authority's legal personality, staff and assets, without creating a replacement bureaucracy.

The draft separates responsibilities to prevent conflicts: the border forces protect the borderline and the areas between ports; the Authority manages coordination and shared infrastructure within ports; customs makes customs decisions; passport control decides on entry and departure; and technical bodies make their own health, agricultural and standards decisions. It then brings these bodies together through a national council without separate administrative autonomy, joint command centres, unified operating procedures, an interoperability platform, and a decision log showing who did what, when and why.

The draft adopts risk management instead of universal inspection, prevents repeated data and document entry, and requires a digital trail for charges, seals, weighing, cameras and chain of custody. It also establishes specific integrity rules, rotation in sensitive posts, protected reporting and monitoring of internal collusion, while affirming travellers' legal safeguards, the right to complain, and lawful treatment of protection applicants, trafficking victims and children.

II — Proposed Legislative Policy

Core Institutional Choices
AreaProposed rulePurpose
BorderlineThe Border Forces Command is the principal operational body, with military support for threats exceeding the scope of law enforcement.Prevent gaps in responsibility between ports of entry.
Official port of entryThe Border Ports Authority manages coordination, shared infrastructure and the command centre, without taking over the technical decisions of customs, passport control or health authorities.On-site command without overlapping mandates.
DataInteroperability between government systems, rather than a parallel database for every body.Reduce paperwork and duplication and improve auditing.
InspectionRisk management and targeting, using non-intrusive inspection before manual opening where appropriate.Improve security and reduce crossing times.
The Region and GovernoratesPreserve federal sovereign responsibilities, with implementation protocols, local services and data exchange.Avoid institutional and local disputes.
IntegrityOfficial payment channels, individual accounts, cameras, measured staff rotation, unannounced audits and protected reporting.Target opportunities for corruption within the process itself.

IV — Statement of Reasons

This Law is enacted to unify the legal framework for protecting the borders of the Republic of Iraq and managing international ports of entry; implement exclusive federal responsibilities concerning national security, customs, foreign trade, nationality and residence; address overlapping roles among bodies operating within ports and between borderline security and crossing management; develop Border Ports Authority Law No. (30) of 2016 into a broader framework that preserves the Authority and precisely defines its mandate; adopt risk management, interoperability, digital transformation, integrity, chain of custody and parliamentary oversight; and facilitate legitimate movement of persons and goods while protecting human rights and national sovereignty.

V — Explanatory Memorandum

1. The Law Integrates the Process, Not the Institutions

One of the most common mistakes in border reform is trying to create a single agency that does everything. Customs decisions require financial and legal expertise, entry decisions require residence and passport competence, and health inspections require a technical body. The draft therefore preserves institutions and prevents their duplication, while connecting their steps within a single pathway with clear responsibilities and timeframes.

2. The Borderline Differs from the Port of Entry

Protecting the areas between ports is a continuous border security function involving surveillance, patrols and response. A port itself is an organised crossing point where multiple services and decisions intersect. The Law separates the two domains and then establishes handover rules so that the area near a port does not become a gap in responsibility.

3. Retaining the Border Ports Authority Instead of Creating a New Authority

Law No. (30) of 2016 established an existing authority with assets, staff and institutional experience. The less costly and faster solution is to broaden the legal framework and clarify responsibilities, rather than create a parallel authority. The same legal entity therefore continues, with its function directed towards managing joint operations, data and infrastructure, while technical bodies retain their decision-making powers.

4. From Universal Inspection to Risk Management

Inspecting every traveller and consignment consumes time and resources and may actually reduce security quality by treating high and low risks alike. The proposed model collects advance data, targets higher-risk cases and retains random audit selection, measuring targeting accuracy rather than merely the number of inspections.

5. Digitalisation Does Not Mean a New System Every Time

Government projects and systems already exist for customs, transit and certificates. Buying a new platform does not solve the problem if data remain isolated. The draft therefore makes interoperability the default, identifies the “source of truth” for each data item, prohibits shared accounts, and links every amendment to the employee's identity and its time.

6. Integrity Is Part of Operational Design

Penalties after corruption occurs are not enough. The Law prohibits unofficial payments, makes charges verifiable, links weights, images and seals to transactions, applies individual access permissions, and encourages unannounced audits and protected reporting. These tools reduce opportunities for manipulation before they become criminal cases.

7. The Federation, Region and Governorates

The Constitution establishes exclusive federal responsibilities for national security, borders, customs, nationality and residence. At the same time, ports located in governorates or the Region require local services and daily cooperation. The draft therefore distinguishes sovereignty, which remains federal, from implementation and service arrangements that may be governed by agreements, protocols and data exchange.

8. Security and Human Rights Are Not Conflicting Choices

The draft gives border agencies clear powers but ties restrictions to a legal basis and a documentable reason, prohibits indefinite detention, and ensures referral of protection applicants and trafficking victims to the appropriate procedures. Legal discipline improves security by preserving the admissibility of evidence in court and reducing arbitrary decisions.

VI — Alignment with Existing Legislation and Institutions

Reference or InstitutionStatus after the Draft Enters into Force
Border Ports Authority Law No. (30) of 2016Repealed and replaced by this Law, while preserving the Authority, its rights, obligations, assets and staff.
Instructions No. (3) of 2018Remain temporarily effective insofar as consistent, then reviewed within 180 days.
Customs Law No. (23) of 1984, as amendedRemains the specific law governing customs decisions and procedures; the draft adds a framework for coordination, risk management, interoperability and a shared chain of custody.
Foreigners' Residence Law No. (76) of 2017Remains the reference for foreigners' entry, residence and departure; the draft unifies procedures within the port.
Passports Law No. (32) of 2015Remains the reference for citizens' travel documents, subject to applicable judicial rulings concerning any amendments.
Ministry of Interior / Border Forces CommandResponsible for security of the borderline and areas between ports, coordinating with ports and the armed forces according to the risk.
Border Ports AuthorityBecomes the hub for coordination, operational management, shared infrastructure and data within ports, without absorbing other bodies' responsibilities.
Existing Digital SystemsIntegrated through interoperability; replaced only where a functional or security gap is demonstrated.

VII — Transitional Provisions and Implementation Requirements

First 90 Days: Form the National Council, approve the transition plan, prepare the responsibility matrix, and inventory current charges, systems and permits.

Within 180 days: Update instructions, adopt unified operating procedures and the code of conduct, begin reviewing access cards, and establish risk management and emergency standards.

Within 12 months: Activate command centres at major ports, unify performance dashboards, and connect core records, cameras, weights and chain of custody.

Within 18 months: Complete interoperability for the principal bodies or grant a reasoned extension to a particular body, maintaining secure alternatives without disrupting legitimate movement.

VIII — Financial and Implementation Impact

The draft does not recommend establishing a new ministry or authority, thereby avoiding the fixed cost of additional structures. Its main fiscal impact lies in connecting systems, command centres, maintenance of inspection and surveillance equipment, upgrading infrastructure at weaker ports, training and cybersecurity. Because these costs vary substantially between ports, and public sources lack a unified asset database supporting a reliable estimate, the draft does not provide a falsely precise aggregate figure.

Mandatory Financing Method: Before any capital project is included, the Authority, in coordination with the Ministries of Planning and Finance, shall prepare an asset baseline. Each project shall account for establishment costs; five years of operations, maintenance, communications, licensing, spare parts and training; existing equipment that can be reused; and integration costs with current systems. Alternatives shall then be compared by life-cycle cost rather than purchase price.

Some reforms are expected to generate operational savings by reducing paperwork, duplication, untargeted inspections and parallel systems, and may improve revenue by reducing smuggling and manipulation. These savings must not, however, be booked as guaranteed revenue before a baseline is established and actual measurement conducted.

Ninth — Comparative International References

The draft draws on the international shift towards coordinated border management, particularly the World Customs Organization's SAFE Framework, which combines supply chain security, trade facilitation, cooperation between customs and government agencies, and risk management. The 2025 edition emphasises inter-agency cooperation, insider threats and integrity, principles reflected in the rules on interoperability, auditing and internal collusion risks.

Other countries' models are not transposed literally to Iraq. Its federal constitutional structure, multiple land, maritime and air ports, the presence of a Region and governorates, and borders with differing security environments require an Iraqi model that preserves federal decision-making while allowing flexible implementation arrangements without duplicated sovereign authority.

X — Sources and References

  1. Constitution of the Republic of Iraq, 2005 — Iraqi Council of Representatives — Official/Institutional Link. Articles 109 and 110, particularly exclusive federal responsibility for national security policy, protection of Iraq's borders, customs policy, and regulation of nationality and residence.
  2. Border Ports Authority Law No. (30) of 2016 — Ministry of Justice — Official/Institutional Link. The Authority's existing legal framework before the proposed law.
  3. Border Ports Authority Law No. (30) of 2016 — Translation Published by the Ministry of Justice — Official/Institutional Link. Reference for the structure of the existing law and the Authority's status.
  4. Instructions No. (3) of 2018 — Units and Functions of the Border Ports Authority — Official/Institutional Link. Regulatory reference for units and functions established under the law in force.
  5. Supreme Judicial Council Study on Border Ports — 23/Studies/2025 — Official/Institutional Link. Explains the practical relationship between seizure reports, customs law, the role of port employees and judicial enforcement.
  6. Customs Law No. (23) of 1984, as Amended — Published Official References — Official/Institutional Link. Remains the specific reference for customs procedures and enforcement, complemented by the proposed law's integrated management provisions.
  7. Foreigners' Residence Law No. (76) of 2017 — Ministry of Justice — Official/Institutional Link. Reference for foreigners' entry, residence and departure.
  8. Passports Law No. (32) of 2015 — Ministry of Justice — Official/Institutional Link. Reference for citizens' travel documents, noting subsequent judicial developments concerning its amendment.
  9. Ministry of Justice — Federal Supreme Court Decision Concerning the First Amendment to the Passports Law — Official/Institutional Link. Documents the ruling that First Amendment Law No. (6) of 2025 is unconstitutional.
  10. Ministry of Finance — ASYCUDA Project and Integration of Customs Procedures — Official/Institutional Link. Documents existing digital customs systems and connections with the Border Ports Authority and other bodies, supporting the principle of connecting systems rather than creating a parallel one.
  11. National Centre for Digital Transformation — Uboor Platform — Official/Institutional Link. An example of existing government infrastructure for certificates, transit movement, TIR and data connectivity.
  12. Council of Representatives — Committee on Border Ports and Protection of the National Product — Official/Institutional Link. Reference for current parliamentary oversight of port and customs operations.
  13. World Customs Organization — SAFE Framework of Standards 2025 — Official/Institutional Link. International reference for supply chain risk management, cooperation between customs and government bodies, and trade security and facilitation.
  14. IOM Iraq — Cross-border Monitoring Report, Sep–Nov 2025 — Official/Institutional Link. A recent reference on the nature of movement through some Iraqi crossings with Türkiye and Syria.

Ali Zuweid's Political Programme · POL-30 · Version 1.0

What are you looking for?

Search content published on the website.