Mr Davis said the motion will be tabled in the Commons this week, and if it is accepted by Speaker John Bercow it could be debated before the summer recess.
Advertisement
The Labour leader, who this week apogised on behalf of his party for the war despite being having long personally opposed it, said he would “probably” back the motion when asked.
Mr Davis said punishment for holding the House in contempt could include withdrawal of Mr Blair’s membership of the Privy Council.
Mr Blair has apologised for any mistakes made, but not the decision to go to war. That is surely how a parliamentary democracy works.
Speaking about Mr Davis’ plans, Mr Corbyn said: “I haven’t seen it yet but I think I probably would [vote in favour of it]”.
In 1961, parliament voted on a motion saying Tory War Secretary John Profumo had held Parliament in Contempt by lying about an affair he had with model and showgirl Christine Keeler.
It comes after the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War published its findings, reaching several conclusions damaging to Mr Blair.
THE Iraq war was illegal but former prime minister Tony Blair cannot be held criminally responsible, a Bournemouth University legal expert has said.
He said that “the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, came to the Cabinet, verbally announced it was legal, but provided no documentation”, adding, “the timing of the decision was clearly created to endorse an nearly immediate action for us to go to war”.
Writing in The Sunday Mirror, Mr Prescott said he will live with the decision made to invade Iraq and the subsequent “catastrophic consequences” for the rest of his life. “With great sadness and anger, I now believe him to be right”, Prescott reportedly wrote.
Launched with the stated goal of wiping out Saddam Hussein’s stores of weapons of mass destruction, the war aimed to enshrine a liberal democracy in the Middle East but instead unleashed sectarian violence and endless political disputes.
“He might have done one of those accidentally, but five?”
It is not a direct reaction to the invasion of Iraq, but following Sir Chilcot’s inquiry it now sits at more than 20,500 signatures.
In 2004, however, a USA report said that Saddam had destroyed his last WMD over a decade ago and had no capacity to build new ones.
Advertisement
“We have also concluded that the judgements about the severity of the threat posed by Iraq’s WMD were presented with a certainty that was not justified”. It said the whole invasion was “a strategic failure”, particularly the United States decision to dismantle Saddam Hussein’s army.
