header-logo header-logo

24 April 2008 / Julian Samiloff
Issue: 7318 / Categories: Features , Public , Procedure & practice , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Who should declare war

Julian Samiloff ponders who has the present-day power to start military proceedings

It's a fact of our constitution that under the Royal Prerogative the power to declare war and commit British forces to military operations is vested in the prime minister. Parliament has no formal legal role in sanctioning such use although the government, by convention, does undertake to keep Parliament substantially informed. It may be posited that in exercising this particular prerogative the prime minister enjoys what ancient kings once enjoyed: the use of almost absolute power in the application of a discretion, and that in doing so he knows that such use cannot generally be challenged in the courts or stopped by a Parliament controlled by his party.

With some prerogatives, control by judicial review is possible, however, the courts have limited their use of it on the basis that some matters involving the use of the prerogative are issues of “high policy”, including declaring and conducting war, and are not justiciable.

Lord Roskill in Council of Civil Service

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll