A cross-party committee of peers has urged Prime Minister Tony Blair to scrap the government’s right to go to war without first seeking a vote in Parliament. The committee said the vote in Parliament on the Iraq war in 2003 created a new benchmark and Parliament should now have the final say.



The royal prerogative permits ministers to declare war without first seeking parliamentary approval and this is what the peers want to change. They however admit that under some circumstances it may not be possible. But Parliament was not powerless under the present rules as it could scrutinize, debate, question decisions.



Chancellor Gordon Brown has signaled that he wants Prime Ministers to be stripped of the power to go to war without first seeking a vote in Parliament. Conservative leader David Cameron was of the opinion that the change was needed to restore trust in politics.



Former cabinet minister Clare Short’s attempt to change the law through a private members’ bill failed because then Commons Leader Geoff Hoon spoke for long enough to prevent a vote from being taken.



The House of Lords Constitution Committee has in its report said the royal prerogative is outdated and should not be used in a parliamentary democracy. Besides seeking Parliament’s backing, the report recommends that the government must indicate the war’s aims, legal basis size and likely duration



The peers admit there may be times when war would have to be declared without a vote being taken. But in such a case Parliament session should be arranged at the earliest opportunity to seek its backing.



Lord Holme, Chairman of the committee, said senior political figures recognized the Iraq vote had set a precedent. That meant the time was ripe for a new understanding between government and Parliament, he stressed.



The committee’s call comes despite Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer stoutly defending the current arrangements when he appeared before the committee. Formal mechanisms would not work in the reality of military operations, he added. Lord Falconer stressed that the government could not go to war with Parliament against it because it is the embodiment of the people.



General Sir Michael Rose, who commanded UN troops in Bosnia, suggested that soldiers do not want to sacrifice themselves for a cause not fully supported by Parliament. But Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram differed saying that troop morale was decided by whether they had the right equipment, mandate and leadership. Soldiers would be focused on what the task in hand was, he said.



It is a good point the peers have raised-that in a parliamentary democracy the representatives of the people must be consulted before the government decides to go to war. This is of paramount importance when their own country is not being attacked or is in danger of being attacked. Certainly when the government decides to fight someone else’s war, it should not be in such a tearing hurry that it cannot take Parliament’s approval first before sacrificing the lives of its soldiers.



Unfortunately in India the government does not have to seek parliamentary sanction when and against whom to go to war. India also is a parliamentary democracy and it should amend the Constitution so that it becomes mandatory for the government to get approval except in dire circumstances.



Via : BBC