header-logo header-logo

Who should declare war

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

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll