The Yazidi Freedom and Democracy Party, the Democratic Struggle Front Party, and the Kurdistan Society Party "Tafgari Azadi" were dissolved on 1 August by a panel of three judges at Iraq's Supreme Judicial Authority. 

The ruling followed a complaint by the Office of Political Parties and Political Organisations at Iraq's High Independent Electoral Commission (IHEC). The decision mandates the closure of their headquarters and the confiscation of their assets after exhausting all legal appeal processes.

According to The New Arab, the decision was based on information and evidence from Iraq's national security agency and the office of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani, alleging the parties' links to the PKK, which is considered a significant threat to national security. 

The ruling is grounded in Article 46, Clause Three, of the Political Parties Law No. 36 of 2015, which allows for the dissolution of parties with organisational and financial ties to non-Iraqi entities.

"We refute the accusations; we have not been notified by any court to defend ourselves, and we saw the decision late at night from the media. We do not have organisational or financial ties to either the PKK or any other local or foreign sides. We will appeal the decision within a month," Salam Abdulla Omar, Co-president of Tafgari Azadi, said in an exclusive interview with TNA in Sulaimani following a press conference by the party on the issue. 

"By this biased decision, we think Iraq's judiciary is under serious questions of being manipulated by political pressures. We think this decision is a very dangerous precedent for Iraq's democratic process, which we had hoped to be democratic. Also, this decision is terminating the principle of coexistence among Iraq's society," Omar added.

Omar described the reasons for banning the party as "very weak and illogical," claiming they were based on regional and local political influence and misinformation. 

He accused Turkey and the ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) of influencing the court to ban the party due to its opposition to Turkey's military incursions into Iraq to combat PKK militants.

"We are paying the price of our political stances against Turkey's invasion of Kurdistan region territories in Duhok province with a depth of 20 to 40 kilometres. Unfortunately, the KDP is cooperating with Turkey in this invasion, and the Iraqi government also lacks any stance," Omar said.

When asked about the party's next steps if their appeal is rejected, Omar said it was too early to answer but emphasised they would pursue all legal avenues. 

He expressed shock at the decision, noting that IHEC officials had previously praised the party for adhering to Iraqi laws.

Omar did not deny the party's ideological alignment with Abdullah Ocalan, the imprisoned PKK leader, but argued that many Iraqi parties follow the ideology of foreign forces without facing legal consequences.

He warned that banning the three parties could set a dangerous precedent for closing other opposition parties. He called on Iraq's opposition parties, democratic and civil society organisations, judiciary, government, and the international community to protest the decision.

TNA attempted to contact an official from one of the Yazidi parties, but they were unreachable at the time of publication.

Jumana al-Glay, IHEC spokesperson, confirmed that the judiciary's decision was based on their complaint. When asked if the banned parties could form new political entities, al-Glay indicated that they might not be able to.

The PKK has maintained bases in northern Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region. In recent months, Turkey has increased its military presence in northern Iraq and threatened an offensive to clear PKK forces from the border area. 

Turkey frequently conducts strikes against targets in Syria and Iraq that it believes are affiliated with the PKK. Baghdad has protested these strikes as breaches of its sovereignty, but earlier this year, the two governments issued a joint statement acknowledging the PKK as a security threat to both nations.

This decision underscores the ongoing tensions between regional political dynamics and national security concerns in Iraq. The dissolution of these parties not only highlights the influence of external actors, like Turkey, but also raises questions about the balance between security measures and democratic freedoms in Iraq.

As the parties prepare to appeal the ruling, the outcome will likely have significant implications for the future of political pluralism and stability in the region.