This article examines the legal challenges involved in enshrining internationally derived political rights and freedoms within the Iraqi constitutional framework. It explores the tension between the obligations to adhere to international human rights treaties and charters, on the one hand, and the requirements of national constitutional sovereignty, on the other—using the 2005 Constitution of the Republic of Iraq as a case study. The research addresses a central problem: to what extent can the Iraqi Constitution incorporate political rights and freedoms derived from international law and effectively enshrine them, without compromising the principle of constitutional supremacy or undermining the national constitutional will? The study aims to provide a multi-level critical legal assessment. The study employs a descriptive, analytical, and comparative methodology, examining constitutional texts and relevant legislation, as well as the institutional frameworks tasked with protecting political rights and freedoms, while benchmarking them against the most pertinent international standards. It also proposes a normative framework for measuring the success of the constitutional entrenchment of these rights across two complementary levels: the textual level—concerning the language of protection and the limits of constitutional restrictions—and the institutional level—pertaining to the scope of access to rights, as well as mechanisms for redress, remedy, and oversight. The research concludes that the relationship between international obligations and a national constitution is not necessarily one of conflict; rather, it can be based on a system of mutual calibration that ensures respect for the supremacy of the constitution while simultaneously achieving effective protection for political rights and freedoms. This is contingent upon adopting a constitutional interpretation that preserves the essence of a right—preventing it from being hollowed out—and ensures that the regulation of political rights serves as a tool for empowerment and guarantee, rather than a means for restriction or confiscation.