On 28 September, legal expert Ali al-Tamimi, speaking on Al-Ahad TV (AAH — official), said the Iranian-flight restriction violated Articles 1–6 of Civil Aviation Authority Law No. 148 of 1974. He argued that the authority alone issues aviation instructions, that constitutional Article 80 permits licence withdrawal rather than a flight ban, and that civil-aviation Article 17 requires continued airport services; he called for an extraordinary parliamentary session. Economist Nasser al-Kinani, on the same outlet, estimated annual aviation receipts at $4.6 billion for government operators and $1.5 billion for private operators, and losses from the restriction at more than $6 billion; those legal and financial conclusions are the guests’ claims.
- Al-Ahad TVAAH — official28 Sept, 14:05
“Economist Nasser al-Kinani: Government aviation collects $4.6 billion and private aviation $1.5 billion annually, while losses from the Iranian-flight ban exceed $6 billion.”
الخبير الاقتصادي ناصر الكناني: الطيران الحكومي يجبي 4.6 مليارات دولار والخاص 1.5 مليار سنوياً وخسائر حظر الطيران الإيراني تتجاوز 6 مليارات دولار
- Al-Ahad TVAAH — official28 Sept, 14:05
“Legal expert Ali al-Tamimi: The Iranian-flight ban violates Articles 1–6 of Civil Aviation Authority Law No. 148 of 1974; the authority alone issues instructions; constitutional Article 80 allows licence withdrawal, not a flight ban; airlines complied because they fear U.S. sanctions; Iraq is in a ‘grey area’ regarding U.S. sanctions on Iran; parliament should hold an extraordinary session; and ci”
الخبير القانوني علي التميمي: قرار حظر الطيران الإيراني يخالف قانون سلطة الطيران المدني رقم 148 لسنة 1974 المادة 1 الى المادة 6؛ الجهة الوحيدة التي تصدر التعليمات هي سلطة الطيران المدني؛ المادة 80 من الدستور تنظم الطيران المشترك وتجير سحب الترخيص وليس حظر الطيران؛ شركات الطيران تخشى العقوبات الأميركية ولهذا خضعت لقرار الحظر على الطيران الإيراني؛ العراق في المنطقة "الرمادية" في ما يخص العقوبات الأمي
The legal guest’s proposed parliamentary session is a specific institutional step, whereas the economist’s figure is a cost claim; the two should not be treated as independently verified findings.