Dispute over UN mandate in crisis management question flares up again in Parliament

Some MPs would want mere reference to UN Charter in crisis management law

print this

There are still at least three differing views among the Finnish MPs as to what the proposed crisis management law should say about the conditions under which Finnish troops could take part in international crisis management operations.
     
Some of the opposition MPs demand that a mandate from the United Nations Security Council be the absolute precondition for Finland's participation in such operations.
      The government, in turn, proposes that as a rule the UN mandate is required, but in exceptional cases Finnish troops could be sent to other operations as well.
      A third group of MPs suggests the removal of the requirement for the UN mandate and the possibility to deviate from it from the bill, and that the law only contain a reference to the UN Charter or principles.
      The dispute over the crisis management law's mandate article flared up again on Tuesday during the second parliamentary discussion over the motion. The aim is now to pass the law through the expedited special legislation route.
     
The Christian Democrats, the True Finns, and part of the Left Alliance were in favour of holding on to the UN mandate requirement.
     
The Left Alliance chairwoman Suvi-Anne Siimes pointed out sharply that the government was about to turn Finland into the only European country with a law saying directly that the United Nations Charter could be deviated from.
      "Therefore the proposed law has to be changed. References to the UN mandate and possible deviating from it have to be removed. Instead, Finland could take part in military crisis management operations that are in accordance with the UN Charter or the UN aims and principles", Siimes claimed.
      Siimes's party colleague Jaakko Laakso, in turn, insisted that Siimes's suggestion is "even worse than that of the government". According to Laakso, Siimes's arguments were the same as those used by the US President George W. Bush to justify the attack on Iraq.
      The government representatives refrained from commenting whether Parliament could start making changes to the content of the crisis management law.
     
Kimmo Sasi (National Coalition Party), the chairman of the Committee for Constitutional Law, implied in his comments that the committee was satisfied with the government's new arguments and would no longer stand in the way of the government proposal.
      Instead, Sasi took the opportunity of criticising President Tarja Halonen and Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen for "agreeing" that Vanhanen represent Finland in the next summer's G8 summit in St Petersburg, as the newspapers printed it.
      "These are not matters of agreement. The Constitution clearly states that the Prime Minister goes."
      According to Sasi, it is regrettable to "give the impression" that something could be agreed on regardless of what the Constitution says.
     
The proposed new law on crisis management response would replace the current legislation covering the sending of Finnish peacekeepers to trouble-spots abroad. According to the wording of the new law, Finland could henceforth send troops on an assignment that did not have the express sanction of the United Nations, for example in the case of Finnish troops in the European Union's rapid deployment forces.


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Government to propose expedited procedure for crisis management law (15.2.2006)
  Prime Minister Vanhanen to represent EU in G8 summit in St. Petersburg (21.2.2006)

Links:
  Charter of the United Nations

Helsingin Sanomat