The grounds of the cassation (Reasons) is how true and valid is the age of the applicant, and whether it is (less than 18 years) which what the defence refers to as (authority of the court) should it fall under the jurisdiction of the child court or the criminal court? Third: I am of the opinion and without indulging in the discussion of what the defence has risen on his cassation request, we should follow exclusively the interpretation of the law based on the following angles: 1. The criminal law as being the general law defines an adult under article (3) of Z (interpretation) that an adult means: (has reached the age of puberty by the emergence of the conclusive clear and visible signs and has completed 15 years of age even if these signs are not visible.) 2. The interpretation of a person according to the definition of the child law under article (4) dates (under age and an adult) and according to the legal context (text) an underage child as: (anyone who has not reached the age of 18, and an adult is anyone who has passed the age of 18 years old). 3. The child law for the year 2010 according to the legal interpretation of the procedural law and according to the provisions and rules of legal interpretation is the law that (the law on and about the child whether he or she commits the crime or whether the crime was committed against him or her) and its rules and regulation prevails over the criminal law for the year 1991 because it is a special law and special means it is excluded from the general and it is also the post law according to article (6) paragraph (3) and (4) of the law determining the interpretation of legal laws and general texts for the year 1974 and the judge was decisive according to article (3) of the child law for the year 2010 in determining that its rules and regulation prevail over the criminal law for the year 1991 and above any other law because it on its face, is based on a text, that conclusively testifies its supremacy (the provisions of this law shall prevail over any judgment under any other law that come into conflict with it and interpreted in favour of the child to the extent that it may eliminate such contradiction.) 4. Even though that the child law for the year 2010 prevails over the criminal law for the year 1991 but the judicial doctoring in earlier cases are in contradiction, some are of the opinion that the child law has erred in determining the age of responsibility for the Islamic Sharia’a laws and the constitution which obliges that the case be returned to the criminal law because (adulthood is defined according to the Sharia’a) this contradicts another opinion that the child law does not contradict the provisions of the Sharia’a laws which is the Holy Book and the doctrines of the prophet Mohammed (PBUH) since there does not exist a conclusive text that defines without a doubt the phrase (adult) stated in the Hadith Sharif (the infant of the boy until sexual maturity) and also stated in the Verse of (Sorat Al Nour – The Light) Verse number (59) ‫ستَأأ ِذنُوا َك َما‬ ‫( َوإِ َذا بَلَ َغ أاْلَ أطفَا ُل ِمن ُك ُم ا أل ُحلُ َم فَ أليَ أ‬