A power of recall that depended solely on the electorate and was

"A power of recall that depended solely on the electorate and was not subject to unnecessary hurdles of Parliamentary procedures would show trust in the good sense and fairness of the British people. In return, they might trust Parliamentarians a little more." These words, spoken by Jacob Rees-Mogg, reflect a deep belief in the inherent wisdom of the people and the value of a political system rooted in trust and accountability. Rees-Mogg is proposing a system in which the electorate, the very people who elect their representatives, would have a more direct and powerful means of holding their Parliamentarians accountable. By allowing the power of recall to rest not with convoluted procedures but with the good sense of the people, this vision aims to restore faith in the democratic process. It is a call for trust, not only in the electorate’s judgment, but in the fairness of the system, where representatives are not above scrutiny, but subject to the will of those they serve.

In the ancient world, the idea of accountability was central to the governance of many societies. The Greeks practiced a form of direct democracy in Athens, where the people were not only allowed but encouraged to engage directly in the decision-making processes of the state. Pericles, one of Athens' greatest leaders, spoke of a society where every citizen was invested in the well-being of the community, and where trust in the people's wisdom was paramount. There was a belief that if citizens were given the power to govern themselves, they would not only exercise wisdom but also uphold the common good. Similarly, Rees-Mogg’s words express a trust in the people, recognizing that if they were given the ability to hold their leaders accountable, they would act justly and thoughtfully, ensuring the integrity of the political system.

The Romans too understood the importance of accountability in governance. While Rome had a republic where the Senate was powerful, the citizens—through the tribunes—held the power to veto decisions made by elected officials. This system was a check on power, ensuring that the people had the ability to call their leaders to account. Cicero, the great orator, often spoke of the need for balance in the Roman political system, where the leaders were not above the will of the people but were answerable to them. Rees-Mogg’s vision reflects this ancient ideal of balance between the elected and the electorate, where trust is not a one-way street but a mutual relationship between representatives and the people they serve.

Consider the example of William Wilberforce, the great British abolitionist, who fought tirelessly to end the slave trade. Wilberforce’s efforts were at times met with fierce opposition in Parliament, but he believed in the moral duty of lawmakers to act in accordance with the will of the people. Eventually, his dedication and belief in the fairness of the people’s judgment helped change public opinion, leading to the abolition of slavery in the British Empire. Wilberforce’s work was not only a battle for the abolition of slavery, but also a battle for the belief that representatives must be accountable to the people they serve. In this way, Wilberforce embodied the same spirit of trust in the people that Rees-Mogg speaks of—the understanding that true justice and progress come when the people’s will is heard and respected.

Rees-Mogg’s words also remind us of the importance of democratic values and the responsibility that comes with power. In the ancient Roman Republic, the idea that those in power were not above the law, but subject to the scrutiny and judgment of their fellow citizens, was central to the idea of republicanism. As Julius Caesar rose to power and later became dictator, he began to erode this principle, placing himself above the law and removing the ability of the people to hold him accountable. His actions ultimately led to the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire. Caesar’s disregard for the accountability of leaders was a direct challenge to the idea that peace and justice could only be sustained in a system where trust and accountability were reciprocal between the people and their leaders. Rees-Mogg’s proposal stands as a modern echo of the ancient lesson: true governance relies on the active engagement and trust of the people.

The lesson here is clear: for any system of governance to be truly just, it must allow for constant accountability and mutual trust. Rees-Mogg’s vision of a power of recall that rests in the hands of the electorate speaks to a deeper truth about democratic systems. Peace and justice in society are not just about laws and procedures, but about the trust that exists between the people and their leaders. When that trust is violated or when leaders are allowed to act without consequence, the entire system becomes fragile. By placing accountability directly in the hands of the people, the system remains just, transparent, and responsive to the needs and will of the citizens.

In our own lives, we can take these lessons to heart by embracing our role as active participants in the systems that govern us. Whether as voters, citizens, or members of any community, we must be vigilant in holding those in power accountable, ensuring that trust is never taken for granted. Trust is not something that can be assumed; it must be earned through honesty, transparency, and the willingness to be held accountable for one’s actions. Rees-Mogg’s words call upon us to remember that true peace can only exist when there is mutual trust between the governed and those who govern. Let us work to create systems, communities, and societies where trust, justice, and accountability are the cornerstones of our shared existence.