Main Article Content
Countries and nations aim to continuous development, and one of the most important ways to achieve development and democracy is by strengthening the legislative institution that the Parliament represents. It has the authority to enact laws and supervise the executive authority's activities. In some cases, the Representative Council may perform some illegal actions, which requires the dissolution of this Council. Therefore, this study aimts to find out the justifications used for a dissolving to the Parliament on the one hand, and to identify the constitutional guarantees for this dissolving to prevent the executive authority from overreaching on the other hand. This is normative legal research that has applied the statutory approach, conceptual approach, and factual approach. also To achieve this goal, the study relied on the comparative analytical descriptive method by applying it to Jordan and Kuwait. The findings of the research show that The dissolved house of deputies performs its legislative authority until conducting a new general election to avoid executive dominance over legislative authority. The power of parliament dissolution is one most powerful tool that executive authority exercise to control legislative authority in Jordan and Kuwait. The king can decree parliament dissolution for any reason he believes is convenient without any constraints .also the study found that Jordanian and Kuwaiti constitutions constrain dissolution rights with specific guarantees, including not dissolving two successive parliament for the same ground, the predefined period for a new general election, and if it was not conducted in the predefined time, the dissolved parliament has a constitutional power to restore his constitutional powers and rights after the expiration of election time. So it is not permissible to resort to dissolving the Parliament except in cases of necessity and there is a legal justification for that.