The attack on Libya has revealed the peculiarities of the United Kingdom's uncodified constitution.
It was the Prime Minister David Cameron and his ministers who decided on attacking Libya without needing a vote or even debate in Parliament. It is one of the powers that come under the remit of the Royal Prerogative.
Who can commit the UK to fight a war?
The power to declare war or hostilities is a power originally exercised by the Monarch. The wars of the 17th century, such as the English Civil War, put many constraints upon royalty. The constitutional settlement after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the following year's Bill of Rights restricted the powers of the Monarch, handing several key ones, including the decision to go to war, to the King's ministers. This is the origin of the Royal Prerogative.
The British constitution is uncodified and consists of several key documents such as the Bill of Rights and Magna Carta along with custom, tradition and precedent. The tradition is that the Prime Minister declares war using the Royal Prerogative. Parliament is not called upon to vote on the issue, although a debate may be held.
The Iraq war 2003
A parliamentary debate and vote took place on going to war with Iraq in 2003, which the government won. By the time of the debate in the House of Commons (the lower, and more powerful legislative house), preparations for conflict were well advanced on orders of the then Prime Minister Tony Blair.
In the aftermath of the Iraq war, the Butler Inquiry into the decision criticized the nature of the Prime Minister's "sofa government" or how important decisions were made by a small group of people. On the 15 July 2004, the BBC quoted the report as saying in an article entitled "Curtains for Blair's 'sofa cabinet?" as saying: "The informality and circumscribed character of the government's procedures which we saw in the context of policy making toward Iraq risks reducing the scope for informed political judgment."
The Chilcot Inquiry is currently examining the decision to go to war in Iraq with a wider remit than Butler. Several newspapers have reported senior civil servants saying that the decision to go to war was made by the Prime Minister without consent of the cabinet (the leading committee of the executive composed of the most important ministers). On the 25 July 2011, The Daily Telegraph website reported in "Tony Blair went to war without cabinet consent, senior mandarins say": "Lord Turnbull [a leading civil servant] said that the cabinet was not asked for their approval until the eve of the invasion in March 2003, by which time they were 'imprisoned' and had little choice but to consent - or bring the prime minister down."
Reform of the Royal Prerogative?
A Parliamentary inquiry was held into the issue of the Royal Prerogative to decide on war, with politicians, generals and constitutional experts giving evidence. The committee recommended removing the Royal Prerogative from the Prime Minister and handing it to parliament not by a change of law but by convention.
The Committee concluded: "The exercise of the Royal Prerogative by the government to deploy armed force overseas is outdated and should not be allowed to continue as the basis for legitimate war-making in our 21st Century democracy. Parliament's ability to challenge the executive must be protected and strengthened." (Waging War, Constitution Committee Report, 1 May 2007)
In March 2008, The government published a white paper (a discussion paper that forms the basis of a bill) called The Governance of Britain, which argued Parliament be given a formal role in approving the "deployment of the Armed Forces in situations of armed conflict. The Government proposed that that role would be established by a Resolution of the House of Commons." (House of Commons Library research paper 08/88 27 November 2008)
Prime Minister is supreme over Parliament
But this was never enacted. On 2 March 2011, the Financial Times website in "Dummies' guide to running Britain" reported: "The Commons' political and constitutional reform committee's Graham Allen tried repeatedly but unsuccessfully to introduce a war powers bill" to give Parliament the power to decide about going to war.
The preparations for the attack on Libya has taken several weeks to prepare at the United Nations and European Union, but there has been no debate in parliament about whether armed force should be used. A debate has been scheduled for Monday 21 March, 2011, two days after lethal force has been deployed.
The unwritten British constitution continues to throw up anomalies such as allowing the Prime Minister and a few advisers to decide on such a major course of action as going to war, with the subsequent cost of lives, even after the Iraq war in 2003 and several inquiries.
Because the UK constitution rests upon tradition and precedent, it is still a grey area and unresolved whether the Prime Minister of the day has to go to Parliament to debate or win a vote in order to go to war.
SourcesBBC website "Curtains for Blair's 'sofa cabinet'?", 15 July 2004Daily Telegraph website "Tony Blair went to war without cabinet consent, senior mandarins say", 25 January 2011.
New Statesman website, transcript of Lords Committee, Parliament: Waging War (Constitution Committee Report), 1 May 2007.
Financial Times website "Dummies' guide to running Britain", 2 March 2011Ministry of Justice, "The Governance of Britain", March 2008House of Commons Library for research paper 08/88, 27 November 2008The website of Parliament's constitution committee
Keith Sellick - Independent media professional with more than 20 years experience working in print and online
Join the Conversation