Following the ongoing debate behind the prorogation of parliament by Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, I wish to offer reasons as to why the prorogation witnessed on December 30 of 2009 was not justified. Constitutionally, it is the prime minister’s duty to suspend the parliament after permission from the Governor-General. However, the reason behind the decision to prorogue was, is, and continues to be one: to review and restructure the prevailing government agenda. In addition, people cannot assume the underlying rules governing the prorogation process. Consequently, should this happen, then justice must have been interfered with. After a thorough investigation of the incident as it unfolded in Canada, I undoubtedly believe that there was no fairness in the prorogation. ‘Misuse’ of power is one of the reasons behind my stand.
To ‘misuse’ is to use the right thing to do the right job but in the wrong way. Within the context of the constitution, it is the Governor’s duty to tell the prime minister what to do in case of any burning issues. However, proroguing is not the only thing the governor has for the prime minister. He/she can as well tell him/her to face the parliament depending on the nature of the crisis. In the then political atmosphere of Canada, it was evident that chances of the government being defeated by the opposition were high, though it did not want to face the defeat, which is to deprive the opposition of their right to win. The best and just alternative for the governor-general was to refer the prime minister to the face of the parliament. However, to make sure that they were not defeated, she went for the proroguing alternative, which is not right, constitutionally and ethically before the eyes of the public. Is this not a misuse of power? Macleod observes, “The current…government…led by prime minister Harper has abused the prerogative powers…of prolonging illegitimately…” (5). The governor sought to use her power in favor of her boss, rather than all the Canadians, which is no more than a token of injustice behind the prorogation. In addition, the prorogation was political immorality.
The major reason behind the prime minister’s take was to scoop for him a chance to stay in power when he ought to have been out of it, which is no more than political immorality. I have no issues with a representational democracy where prorogation can arise to avoid opposition. However, this was not the prime minister’s case. He sought to hush the voice of the opposition, who would otherwise have defeated him. Politically, this step is highly opposed implying that whoever practices this is politically immoral and answerable to the law. Therefore, by so doing the proroguing the parliament stands unjustified. In fact, referring to the prime minister’s decision, Alnaar asked, “Is prorogation legitimate when it is not justifiably strong?” (3). Inasmuch as he is a question, his stand concerning justice in the decision is clear: it was not justified. The prime minister did so purely out of fear.
His was an act of fear rather than obedience. It was the issue of the end justifying the means as he sought to restructure the prevailing prorogation process. “No previous prime minister has prorogued the legislature in order to avoid the kind of things that Harper apparently wants to avoid” (Franks Letter). In his avoiding process, he also sought to set a precedent, different from that of the previous ministers. For this to happen, he should have welcomed suggestions from both sides, which he never did.
To sum up and build on my aforementioned reasons, I believe that Prime Minister Harper was not justified in proroguing the parliament. The decision was a misuse of power and politically immoral, founded on fear rather than constitutional obedience.
Works Cited
Alnaar, Lisbon. No Justice in Harper’s Prorogation: Political Immorality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Print.
Frank, Macdonald. Letter. American Journalism Review 2006/2004: 7. Print.
Macleod, Ray. Avoiding Opposition in a Representational Government. New York: Word Press. Print.