This week is momentous for Scotland and the independence movement. The Supreme Court in England will deliver its judgement on the legality or otherwise of the Holyrood proposed Referendum Bill. Now is not the time to question why this particular route was chosen by the SNP leadership. This blog has been quite clear that we thought it a wrong move on the part of the SNP Scottish Government.
We have never believed that a referendum using a Local Authority franchise is the best route to our independence. That said, as the ruling party this is the route chosen by the SNP and that is their democratic right. We also believe that they should have moved the Bill at Holyrood and allowed the UK Government to take any court action in Scotland.
All that said we are where we are today. I think it is fair to say that the majority of independence supporting Scots are not in a confident mood about the outcome. The Supreme Court in England has ruled before on the Sewel Convention and firmly came out with the opinion that Westminster is sovereign. We have no reason to believe they will deliver a different opinion next Wednesday.
We do have some precedent and although that is not something that is key in Scots law it is in English law. Martin Keatings brought a similar case to the Scottish Courts last year. The ruling by the Scottish judges found against Martin.
In an Opinion issued today, three judges refused the pursuer’s appeal, upholding the decision that the action was hypothetical and premature, but allowed the Lord Advocate’s appeal, ruling that the action was inconsistent with the Scotland Act 1998 (which established the Scottish Parliament).
The full ruling is below, however, the shortened version to the best of my limited knowledge was that as there was no actual bill going through Holyrood at that time this was viewed as a hypothetical argument, not a legal argument. It was also, ironically contested by the Scottish Government’s own Lord Advocate that only elected representatives should promote the case, not an ordinary member of the public.
https://www.judiciary.scot/home/sentences-judgments/judgments/2021/04/30/martin-keatings
There is every chance that the Supreme Court in England may take the view that as there is no enacted Bill at Holyrood, the Scottish Government case is hypothetical and is a political, not a legal matter. Should that be the case then it will be down to the governing party at Westminster to decide if they ‘grant permission?’
I know that does not sit well with many of my fellow patriots. We believe in the sovereignty of the people of Scotland and our Claim of Right. We also believe that after winning 3 mandates specifically on holding an Independence referendum democracy dictates that the Scottish Government should be ‘allowed’ to hold a referendum at a time of its choosing with no interference.
Sadly, we do not live in a real democracy. We live inside a corrupt union.We have an imperialist undemocratic form of Government where an English majority always prevails. The British Empire has shrunk. All that is left for London to exploit is its Celtic neighbours and a few protectorates throughout the globe. Scotland is contrary to English public opinion England’s cash cow. Our natural resources are all that keeps Mother England afloat.
Consequently, there are zero chances that London will ever again voluntarily agree to any form of Scottish Independence Referendum. We need to remove the voluntarily from them. We the Scottish people need to bring pressure to bear. Not just upon Westminster but also upon Holyrood too.
There are different views on how we should attain our independence. Some like the SNP think an independence referendum with Westminster’s blessing is the only way to go. Some believe that we need to declare UDI. Others believe that a Plebiscite Election is the answer. We have many that think the time has come to call in the UN Decolonisation Unit to force the UK to allow democracy to flourish. Some believe the Claim of Right should be invoked. So many different opinions and divided effort!
Personally I think what the First Minister said on January 31st 2020 is the way to go. No matter the judgement she should call as promised a Scottish Constitutional Convention. All of our MPs and MSPs and Councillors of all parties should be called to Edinburgh and let them decide Scotland’s next move. These are our elected representatives chosen by our votes. The member for Richmond at Westminster did not receive a single Scottish vote what gives him the right to decide Scotland’s form of government?
Here is what Nicola said back in 2020.
That is my preferred choice.I cannot think of any better way to unite our people behind a common cause. If that Convention is brought into being and decides that a referendum or a Plebiscite or whatever is the best route to independence I will support the democratic will of our elected representatives. I would hope everyone of you would be similarly minded.
Unity is the key to Scotland’s freedom.This blog has made many unsuccessful pleas for this. Going back to 2019 pre ISP and Alba we implored the FM to unite the splintering Yes Movement. Many times since similar appeals have been ignored. With every AUOB march or Now Scotland initiative I had hoped that unity of purpose that saw 250,000 march up the Royal Mile in October 2019 would be recreated. Regrettably, too many factions choose to boycott these days because they don’t like this one or that one. Too many self-interest groups decided to stay in their own wee comfort bubbles rather than embrace the main solution to all our problems.
Here is a fact, without independence we cannot solve the main issues troubling Scotland. As long as we have Westminster wrapped around our neck sucking us dry and stealing our resources we cannot tackle the appalling poverty, the hunger, the despair, the inequality that plagues our nation.
All those separate groupings are important and they are all valid. However, working in isolation, your chances of success are limited. I want to appeal to all of you be you SNP, Alba, ISP, SSP, Greens no party. SSRG, Salvo, For Women Scotland, AUOB, Now Scotland, Homeless Scotland, LGB groups, individuals, all shades of opinion unite in common purpose for Scotland. We have an opportunity before us to send a strong message to both Bute House and Number 10 that the Scots are not prepared to be told to Wheesht anymore. We will not be ignored.
Lesley Riddoch and her team at Time for Scotland have organised rallies throughout Scotland to coincide with the Supreme Court judgement. The main rally is at Holyrood, 5.30 – 7.30 pm. There are other rallies in Inverness, Borders, Dumfries, Dundee, Glasgow, Inverurie, Perth, Skye and Aberdeen. In the article below you can see the meeting places, the times and how to get involved. If we start finding excuses not to participate London wins again! I would plead with everyone to set aside any differences and unite in common cause. This applies equally to those that want a pledge signed before admitting people to campaign for independence. That is a nonsense the only requirement should always be a desire for independence nothing else is more important. We need no more divisive politics we need unity!
https://www.timeforscotland.scot/about-the-rally/local-events
If we are divided Westminster will always win. Do not tell me why you cannot attend only tell me how many you are taking along with you. I do not want to hear from those not willing to put Scotland’s interests before their own. That kind of thinking has held us back for far too long. Let us make our voices heard. Let us put the band back together again. Let London and the rest of England know why our motto is Nemo me impune lacessit!
Regrettably, Sturgeon and her cult are not the least bit interested in unity unless it is entirely on her terms. (I hope I’ve used the correct pronoun).Nor will she take any step to forward the progress of independence.
btw Roddy, have you noticed that Barrhead Boy does not appear in a search of Twitter?
I have been getting marginalised since Feb this year when I refused to join in the Russophobia.
Yes Roddy. There are those within our community who are itching for war with Russia.
For them things are simple. Russia bad, Putin the Devil. No other agenda in world geo politics.
Not for them any notions of a proxy war. Not even a scintilla of doubt when it was this week announced that Russia had attacked Poland and that Zelensky’s call for Nato to attack Russia was false flag.
And false flag it truly was. Ukraine had launched the missiles. Not Russia. And Zelensky had lied.
It is obvious now that the marches have lost their appeal. Time to march and protest outside Bute House every week. Would not take many people to make a mark on what you are trying to achieve. Bute House is the place now me thinks.
I agree, Sandy. One last round of marches all over Scotland, then, after that Bute House and Holyrood. No other way now. Need to make sure that videos go viral and/or invite foreign media representatives to attend.
The Supreme Court should be defunct because it was set up to deal with EU laws – or, at least, that was to be its main function – but, now, it seems that it has become the supreme court for constitutional matters, as the old House of Lords court was.
Alec Salmond did protest strongly that the powers of the HoL court should be returned to Scotland in full, to the Court of Session, as was the case before the Union, when the idea of a Supreme Court was mooted first. In fact, it was a few years into the Union before, by sleight of hand, the English MPs ensured that the HoL became the equivalent of the Supreme Court in order that all constitutional matters and, as the court of final appeal for civil matters, had to be heard there. Now, it does remit civil matters to the Court of Session for final pronouncement (with advice) but still keeps constitutional matters close.
It is possible for the Court of Session to rule on certain Scottish constitutional matters, but any judgement may still be heard in the Supreme Court on appeal, so that English constitutional law predominates, as does the supremacy of Westminster. There is no way round this without challenging the Treaty and Acts of Union, wherein lie Scotland’s constitutional rights. Whatever we do, we will come up against England’s interests and Westminster’s hegemony. No way to go except to establish, as BB says, a constitutional convention/assembly and challenge both the Supreme Court and Westminster’s hegemony by taking our case to the UN and the international court.
That can be done via the auspices of a convention/assembly, in the name of the Scottish people because the SG/Holyrood will not enact the legislation necessary for independence (UDI, that is, unilateral declaration of independence without imposing on others as, for example, the Rhodesian UDI did by making the black population second-class citizens; no such suggestion has even been mooted in Scotland in relation to our populations that are not indigenous Scots) and we have no other way forward.
It was October 2021 and the Supreme Court render a judgement on two Bills presented to the Scottish Parliament. An extract from the SC judgement:
“The Supreme Court unanimously decides that sections 6, 19(2)(a)(ii), 20(10)(a)(ii) and 21(5)(b)(ii) of the UNCRC Bill and sections 4(1A) and 5(1) of the ECLSG Bill would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.”
One of the reasons given for that judgement was this:
“Section 28(7) of the Scotland Act preserves the unqualified power of the UK Parliament to make laws for Scotland. If any provision of an Act of the Scottish Parliament purports to modify section 28(7) of the Scotland Act, it will contravene section 29(2)(c) of that Act, read together with paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 4 to that Act, and will therefore fall outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament.”
We now await a further Supreme Court judgement, and I speculate that if the above factors (and more) play their part, Scotland and its people will be told that it is outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament to hold a Referendum not just in October 2023, but on any future date, precedent will have been established.
I also speculate that result, if it occurs, will radically change the nature of the debate within Scotland, in many different and important ways, not least in the reaction it will provoke.
Just my 2p ….only time will tell.
I’ll be frank. I’ve had it with “unity”.
I have no shortage of reasons.
First of all, nobody was insisting on unity when Alex was leader. Some people had different opinions, but it was acceptable to debate them and most of these debates happened in good faith. The real division started around 2018 and that was when any difference in opinion was met, not by debate, but by demanding “unity”. Since that started, divisions started multiplying.
Secondly, we actually have had unity at ballot box. Nicola has won vote after vote, year after year, mandate after mandate. All we have to show for it is resounding proof that her “divisive” critics were perfectly correct. Her leadership has achieved nothing for independence. No legal progress, no rise in support, nothing.
I’d add that when most of us talk about unity, we think of collective dialogue, come-and-go. Nicola’s supporters don’t want to listen to anyone except Nicola. Indeed they demonize anyone who challenges her wisdom. So the kind of reciprocal respect for ideas and perspectives isn’t something they’re emotionally capable of.
And finally, it really might help if we all support a diversity of strategies, with SNP seeking gradualist progress (Why not? Good luck), Alba and IFS doing a more fundamentalist approach and Salvo bypassing Westminster to h go to international law. These could all be supported together.
We might actually need diversity, not unity.
If ” Unity is the key ” , Nu SNP are the padlock , Salvo/SSRG/ALBA are the crowbar , and if that’s not sufficient – the battering ram .
Dominic , above , says ” We might actually need diversity , not unity ” , indeed , though , those two things needn’t be in opposition . We can – and if the current SNP * Leadership * were not such power-crazed wasters , would – have both . Diversity of approach / unity of purpose . Only dimwits would consider this a contradiction .
Excellent post Roddy