The Trilogy by Breeks is complete 

 

In the first instance, the Constitutional Grand Assembly might take it’s lead

from the Faculty of Advocates, and write an open letter to chastise Sturgeon’s

abandonment of Constitutional principle, the way the Faculty of Advocates felt

compelled to publicly chastise Sturgeon’s contempt for due trial process and a

not guilty verdict. Sturgeon’s reaction to that intervention will determine her

political fate and the fate of Holyrood.

Sturgeon’s capitulation to Brexit subjugation is, in my opinion, more than

adequate cause for impeachment. Not just for her, but perhaps impeachment

for the whole principle of a devolved parliament altogether. A Scottish

Constitutional Grand Committee must have the nerve to contemplate forcing

that issue to that conclusion, and become either the kill or the cure for

Holyrood’s ills. But whatever the outcome may be, only when Scotland has

realigned itself properly with it’s “red” Sovereign Constitutional rights and

national integrity, can the “real” end game of the Union begin.

Sturgeon must understand she cannot go forward with any more of this

obsequious deference to Westminster’s colonial opportunism. The 1998

Scotland Act IS NOT our nation’s Constitution, and Scotland’s “Government”

must end this masquerade of compromise and working together constructively

for the sake of expedience. Sturgeon’s “Government” is collaborating with

raw, colonial encroachment which must instead be disputed and defeated, but

yet whenever challenged, the SNP battens down the hatches and ploughs on

regardless, as if obstinacy was the only grace which mattered. There is

something about that, that is really beginning to stink.

Therefore Scotland’s Constitutional Grand Committee must be more than a

civic assembly. It must be well prepared and ready for battle. Not, I pray, a

blood and bullets battle, but it must become Scotland’s “Expert Witness” in all

things Scottish, and be ready to dispute and manfully contest :-

a) The veracity of Westminster’s unwritten convention of Parliamentary

Sovereignty by consent. The convention which, through Brexit, overruled

Scotland’s explicit denial of consent after direct consultation with Scotland’s

sovereign citizens, and thus rendered Brexit a deliberate act of gross and

unlawful subjugation of Scotland’s sovereign will.

b) The integrity and fidelity of the Treaty of Union must be re-examined in the

light of the known breaches to the word and spirit of the 1707 Treaty of Union;

from the unlawful subjugation of one signatory by it’s constitutional equal, to

the Northern Ireland protocol breaching Articles 4 and 6 of the Treaty. If the

Treaty of Union is breached, then it is dead.

c) The 1998 Scotland Act must now be denounced and rejected as a colonial

device, which, through Section 30, sets out to subordinate the will of

Scotland’s constitutionally sovereign people, contrary to the Scottish principle of inalienable popular sovereignty; sovereignty which belongs to Scotland’s
Community of the Realm, thus rendering the whole Scotland Act unsound and
unenforceable in law, a conclusion which also leaves Holyrood swinging in the
breeze.
d) These inevitable battles between Westminster and Scotland’s
Constitutional Grand Committee (with or without Holyrood on side), must be
conducted with monitoring and the active participation of the UN and
international community, and thus a formal liaison mechanism for doing that
needs to be established.
The Constitutional Grand Committee must hit the ground running, and be a
doughty opponent for detractors across the whole spectrum of society from
day 1. If it is prepared to impeach Holyrood, and it must be, then it must also
be prepared to step into the breach that it creates, and become Scotland’s
caretaker Parliament, prompted to action by a Constitutional state of
emergency, compelling it’s intervention to rectify and undo the mess which
Holyrood has got so very wrong constitutionally.
I suspect that may not be strictly necessary. The office delivering the
impeachment does not normally assume the responsibilities of the
“government” it impeaches, but an impeached Holyrood would leave Scotland
with a dangerous governmental vacuum, and if Scotland doesn’t move swiftly
fill it, we can be certain Westminster will.
Our Constitutional Grand Committee must become the acknowledged expert
opinion on all things Scottish, for we can be sure any errors or inadequacies
will be ruthlessly exploited by Scotland’s enemies. Thus, though personally I
loathe Committees and the time it takes to make a decision, and despair at
the type of people committees so often attract, I think the Grand Committee
must have essential specialist subcommittees:
If Scotland proposes to defend it’s Constitutional Sovereignty and integrity in
Law, then it requires both adroit and trustworthy legal representation, and a
similarly studious and equally trustworthy Historical / Constitutional expertise.
Both must have total belief in Scotland’s absolute legitimacy in law. At the
same time, we must be careful to avoid Unionist gatekeepers who might be
reluctant to recognise Scotland’s interests as paramount. There is no room
whatsoever in any of these affairs for any white Westminster sovereignty.
Perhaps Sturgeon’s latest ham fisted efforts to politicise control of Scots Law
away from the Faculty of Advocates and Lord President of the Court of
Session might be fortuitous, particularly if the same esteemed representatives
of Scots Law can be persuaded to actually endorse and support a
Constitutional Grand Committee, and find common cause in defending
Scotland’s Constitutional integrity and the distinctive independence of Scots
Law.

They must see their hegemony and sanctity of Scots Law being eroded by
Westminster’s pernicious encroachment, and be aware of worse things to
come. Scotland’s not proven verdict and trial by jury are already being
undermined, but the process won’t stop there. All the vestigial remnants of
Scotland’s pre-Union nation status, not least the Independence of Scots Law,
are coming under increasing attack and UK homogenisation, and while
Scotland snoozes in indolence, the assaults grow bolder and more frequent.
It is quite possible, indeed inevitable, that a Scottish Grand Committee of the
order I describe would survive Scotland’s transition to Independence and
restored Nation status, and likely exert a significant degree of influence over
the composition of Scotland’s first elections, ratification plebiscite, and the
establishment of our first Independent government. I am quite sure Scotland’s
Legal Fraternity would lend an ear to the proposals. It might be optimistic to
expect a sympathetic ear initially, but a pragmatic ear might be good enough.
If Holyrood is indeed overreaching itself and colluding with the Westminster
Establishment to clip the wings of the Court of Session, it is no small irony that
the Court of Session will be calling upon the same principles of red
sovereignty to defend it’s self. That truth might deliver us a very powerful ally.
We should expect and be prepared for a battle between our academics and
theirs. History and provenance is a battle Scotland should win comfortably,
although caution would be prudent, given decades of deeply set indoctrination
and the known phenomenon of Unionist gatekeepers peppered throughout
our Universities and Institutions as various heads of department. But I will
neither be represented by, nor lectured to, about Scotland’s Constitutional
history by the “celebrated” likes of Neil Oliver.
The media, as ever, is where we are at our weakest. The Union has enjoyed
complete free reign spanning decades, to construct an impregnable monopoly
on broadcasting, with unchecked freedom to defame and / or de-platform
prominent individuals, and steer the political narrative in any direction it likes.
It is no stranger to absolute falsehood and misrepresentation. I don’t think our
YES community has ever realised just how much we are seen as “the enemy”
by the UK Broadcasting establishment. They feel free to deploy extraordinary
measures against Scotland all the time. It is not an excess to be curbed. The
UK media is the scorpion in the fable. Never trust it. It will sting us, always,
because that’s what it does.
Notionally, the answer might be for the Grand Committee to have a
broadcasting sub-committee, and we must find the right and most
knowledgeable people to man it. Even so, broadcasting is too narrow a remit.
The one-way communication of television is becoming obsolete, and being
replaced by the two way communication of social media. Our Independence
fraternity must embrace this new reality from the beginning. We have heroic
efforts by a small few individuals creating terrific output, but a massive amount
of content still needs to be produced. Just imagine for one second, a Scottish “Government” throwing £3 million, then £9 million, at doing just that, rather
than shoring up the crumbling edifice of the Unionist anti-media.
I think somehow, our Constitutional Grand Committee can help here too, and
pioneer some “new” suite of facilities which can be comparable to television,
but television online, a constantly manned online “service”, and interactive 24 – 7, complete with studios for news, information and debate like a TV channel.
An online presence that is easy and comfortable to watch, almost like an
Scottish Independence based Netflix, a library of media content, but also a
capable host for news, debate, and discussion forums, ready to become “the”
hub of any Independence or Referendum campaign.
Lastly, let’s just spell it out so we’re all on the same page. A Constitutional
Grand Committee is about as close are we’re ever likely to come to finding a
diplomatic intermediary that is rift-neutral so to speak, which allows the rank
and file of the YES Movement to detach themselves from divided leadership
and rediscover our common cause and rekindle the warm camaraderie, (and
momentum), there once was between us, but which the poor quality of our
Politicians has put in needless jeopardy.
Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution belongs to all of us, and none of us. But
sovereignty itself is a binary and absolute condition in law, a point of principle
which if needs be, can be steered through the high seas and rolling ocean of
International Law by a single Constitutional Lawyer who knows what he’s
doing, is absolutely determined, and has legitimacy on his side. Scotland
HAS that legitimacy in Law, but can we find the right calibre of lawyer?
It is no yardstick of Scotland’s strength that we measure up to whatever goals,
standards, and “gold standard democracy”, Westminster has set up for us as
“thresholds”. Instead, by doing so, Scotland telegraphs a lack of inner
confidence, a constitutional naivety and broken resolve. Westminster is an old
hand at this, and knows it’s playing yet another round of colonial poker with
someone who still doesn’t know what actually constitutes a winning hand.
Come on Scotland. At this stage in the game, that is just inexcusable.
Scotland’s sovereignty is unconditional. Start acting like it.
Scotland needs a Constitutional Grand Committee and a crash course in how
to be top dog. Yes, lacking experience in such things probably is an
inadequacy, but what can you say? It’s been a while, of course we are rusty.
But if the instincts are there, we can relearn what we once knew. We must.
Never forget, we’re not here to answer for the generations of Scots who have
meekly put up with this grinding subordination. The couldn’t do what we yet
can. We are, I hope, old school. A throwback generation of Auld type Scots,
not the meek and morose subordinate types, but as happy being fierce as we
are fierce at being happy, and more than well enough able take back
command of our own damned country.

When Scottish troops helped France defeat the colonialism of England at the
Battle of Baugé, 21 March 1421, Pope Martin V said of us, “Verily, the Scots
are well-known as an antidote to the English.”
Aye, I’m betting the Europeans weren’t saying that about Scotland after Brexit.
Why the hell would they?