Latest news with #ActsofUnion
The National
21-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Tory MSP fumes as expert says Scotland 'not a partner in a union'
Professor Robert Black, emeritus professor in Scots law at Edinburgh University, argued that Unionist assumptions about the creation of Great Britain under the Acts of Union were wrong in a speech over the weekend. But his comments were met with fury from Scottish Tory MSP Stephen Kerr, who blasted the fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh's comments as 'irrelevant'. Kerr shared a screenshot of The National's story on Twitter/X with the caption: 'This is what the nationalists are now resorting to. Trying to rewrite ... the Act of Union 1707. READ MORE: Scotland 'absorbed into England' by Acts of Union, says top legal expert 'An out of date ideology which is irrelevant – yet still the SNP cling to it and any success for them promotes this sort of thinking.' Prof Black told the Scottish Sovereignty Research Group's conference on Saturday that Scotland had been 'absorbed' into England by the Acts of Union, contrary to the prevailing political view that 1707 marked the creation of a new state called Great Britain. (Image: David Cheskin) He said: 'No honest and conscientious lawyer can look at what happened in the first decade of the 18th century to the institutions of government north and south of the Tweed and reach the conclusion that the pre-existing states of Scotland and England both ceased to exist and that a new state emerged, phoenix-like out of the ashes. 'The evidence, the facts on the ground support no judgment other than that Scotland ceased to exist as a state in international law and was absorbed into a still-extant England, cosmetically renamed 'Great Britain'. READ MORE: Keir Starmer apologises to Welsh MP after attack during PMQs "Scotland's legal status today, more than three centuries later, is therefore not that of a partner in a union – unequal, perhaps, but a union nevertheless – but is that of territory absorbed into a larger country.' Prof Black, a distinguished legal expert who laid the groundwork for the Lockerbie bombing trial in 2001, did not delve into the political consequences of his comments but they were perceived as a landmark moment by his hosts. The Scottish Sovereignty Research Group is allied with Liberation Scotland, which is attempting to have Scotland 'decolonised' by the United Nations.
The National
20-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Case for Scottish independence greater now than ever
PROFESSOR Robert Black, who was a professor of Scots Law at Edinburgh University until his retirement in 2007, has said that in his legal opinion, Scotland was absorbed into England by the Acts of Union of 1707 and as such is not a "partner in a union". Indeed, in the opinion of Professor Black, the "Union" is merely a political fiction bereft of any substantive meaning. Black likened Scotland's situation post 1707 to that of a corporate 'takeover' rather than a 'merger". He said that contrary to the prevailing opinion in legal and political circles, Scotland and England did not merge into a new state with the Acts of Union, pointing to the facts that for England nothing much changed after 1707, treaties that the pre 1707 English state had entered into, such as the Treaty of Windsor which the kingdom of England signed with the kingdom of Portugal in 1386, continued to remain in force, whereas treaties signed by the pre 1707 Scottish state were rendered null and void as Scotland had ceased to exist as a state in international law. Speaking at the Scottish Sovereignty Research Group's conference on Saturday, he said: 'No honest and conscientious lawyer can look at what happened in the first decade of the 18th century to the institutions of government north and south of the Tweed and reach the conclusion that the pre-existing states of Scotland and England both ceased to exist and that a new state emerged, phoenix-like out of the ashes. READ MORE: Statistics from Canada do not back up assisted dying concerns 'The evidence, the facts on the ground support no judgment other than that Scotland ceased to exist as a state in international law and was absorbed into a still-extant England, cosmetically renamed 'Great Britain'. Scotland's legal status today, more than three centuries later, is therefore not that of a partner in a union – unequal, perhaps, but a union nevertheless – but is that of territory absorbed into a larger country. "A territory with only limited self-government and with its resources exploitable and exploited by the larger country for its own benefit and purposes." He explained that in legal terms, Scotland's legal system was altered while England's remained intact, with the House of Lords becoming Scotland's final court of appeal over its pre-Union equivalent. He also highlighted a legal opinion by distinguished legal experts Alan Boyle and James Crawford published before the 2014 referendum, which said that in the event of Scottish independence, the remainder of the UK would be the 'successor state' in terms of international treaties. The Scottish Sovereignty Research Group is associated with an attempt by the organisations Salvo and Liberation Scotland to have the United Nations recognise Scotland as a 'non-self-governing territory' like Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, or Guam. The groups are working with Geneva-based Justice Pour Tous Internationale (Justice for All International) to present Scotland's case to the United Nations. The Swiss organisation rates as "strong" Scotland's case to be recognised as having colonial status and thus to come under the aegis of the United Nations' special committee on decolonisation. However, the United Nations is very much a creature of the powerful existing states and is highly reluctant to add new territories to the 17 which it currently considers to have colonial status. An attempt by West Papuan leader Benny Wenda to have the territory's case heard by the special committee on decolonisation was rebuffed in 2017. West Papua was a Dutch colony which was annexed by Indonesia in 1962 despite Dutch attempts to prepare it for independence in its own right. The population of West Papua are culturally, linguistically, religiously and racially distinct from the rest of the Indonesian population, having far more in common with the people of the independent Papua New Guinea which occupies the eastern half of the massive island of New Guinea. In 1969 Indonesia organised a 'referendum' amongst 1,026 hand-picked village elders who were bribed, threatened and cajoled into voting to ratify the Indonesian annexation. Since annexation, Indonesia has exploited West Papua's natural resources and embarked upon a campaign of resettling hundreds of thousands of people from the over populated islands of Java and Madura, displacing the native Papuans. Political activity amongst native Papuans is severely repressed by the Indonesian government. West Papua is unarguably a colony if the word is to have any meaning, nevertheless, the UN's special committee on decolonisation refused to hear a petition signed by 1.8 million West Papuans and smuggled out of the territory. Committee chair Rafael Darío Ramírez Carreño of Venezuela said that the committee could only deal with the 17 states that had already been identified as 'non-self-governing territories' by the UN General Assembly. As West Papua proves, having a strong, even unimpeachable, case is no guarantee of recognition by the UN as a non-self-governing territory. Given this background, Salvo's and Liberation Scotland's chances of success in presenting Scotland's case to the UN seem slight. The Conservatives have catastrophically collapsed to fourth place in a major new opinion poll from YouGov, behind Reform UK, Labour, and even the Lib Dems. The poll confirms other recent polling showing that the hard right English nationalist Reform UK is currently surging ahead, at least in England, where Westminster elections are decided. Despite Keir Starmer's Labour party currently being as popular as the BBC executive who cancelled River City, the Tories are not the beneficiaries of Labour's fall from grace. That support is going to the political con trick that is Reform UK, the party of 'anti-elite' millionaires. (Image: PA) The YouGov poll of Westminster voting intention puts Reform UK on 29%, Labour on 22%, the Lib Dems on 17% and the Tories on just 16%. Reform UK remains in third place in the poll's Scottish subsample, which puts the SNP on 28%, Labour 19%, Reform UK 18%, Liberal Democrats 15%, Greens 11%, and the Conservatives trailing far behind on just 8%. Neither of the Tories's new leaders, Kemi Badenoch in the UK party or Russell Findlay in Scotland, are able to reverse what increasingly looks like a death spiral for the Conservatives. According to Electoral Calculus, if the poll were the result in a General Election, the Tories could be reduced to 17 seats while Reform UK would have a majority on 346 seats. The need for Scottish independence is growing increasingly urgent.
The National
20-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Scotland can leave the Union, but only one route is viable
His 'practical and workable plan' to achieve independence is to 'provoke a constitutional crisis' by demanding, on the strength of a majority of seats at Holyrood, that London permits an indyref, and on refusal of that by seeking 'international support', having stated a manifesto intention to declare independence on the basis of 'parliamentary democracy' (ie a majority of seats). Unfortunately, that is neither practical nor workable. There is no authoritative forum from which to obtain international support anyway, and the only likely response from abroad to a Scotland pleading for help after having failed to win a majority vote, and having sent only nine of Scotland's 57 MPs as even nominal supporters of independence to the Union parliament, is derision. READ MORE: Scotland 'absorbed into England' by Acts of Union, says legal expert The one and only actually existing way for the people of Scotland to express an effective choice on whether the country should be independent is by means of a General Election made into a plebiscite by the appropriate manifesto. This is because the only other way, a referendum, is legally beyond Holyrood and London persistently refuses to allow one (a refusal, incidentally, which would bar London from complaining about the plebiscitary General Election, if it was minded to do so). Mr Howie offers three reasons to disparage this. 1) 'Any independence supporter who votes for a Unionist party is counted as a No voter.' That's because he is a No voter. 2) 'There is very little likelihood of a 50% Yes vote.' We'll see. If it should turn out that Scotland does not want independence, so be it. But a plebiscitary election is more akin to a referendum than a normal election. It will be down to campaigning, but for years now, one half of Scotland has consistently polled for independence. 3) 'The UK Government will not accept a Yes result.' READ MORE: UK anti-terrorism tsar in Scottish independence 'meddling' claim London has no choice. The legal effect of a General Election is the filling of seats. A head-count majority in a Union General Election would put an indy MP in virtually every Scottish seat, with a fully democratic mandate to take Scotland out of the Union. Those are Scotland's highest representatives, the modern equivalent of the body which took Scotland into it in the first place. London has always affirmed that Scotland can leave if it no longer consents to union, which merely states the actual legal and constitutional position, namely that there is no barrier to Scotland leaving if its people so wish. If there was any such barrier, London could never have made the Edinburgh Agreement, which it did by mere signature of the PM. And in the case of Northern Ireland, the UK has actually declared in legislation that the province can leave. Any suggestion that London can hold Scotland captive against its wishes is so preposterous and so monstrous as to be entirely unconscionable, and that is the view that London would also adopt if, but only if, Scotland ever actually made the decision. (A plebiscitary election at Holyrood can only be a dry run, so long as there is a minority of indy MPs on the Scottish seats at Westminster, but there might perhaps be some small hope that success even at Holyrood would bring London to the table.) The way forward is clear and simple, using the existing set-up, requiring no extra-legal steps, foreign intervention, or crisis. Our problem at the moment is that our only effective mechanism, the SNP, refuses to do the business, and as long as that applies, we are sunk. Ian Roberts via email
The National
19-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
UK anti-terrorism tsar in Scottish independence 'meddling' claim
Jonathan Hall KC, the UK Government's adviser on terrorism law, suggested that ministers may seek to introduce 'anti-subversion' laws to crack down on beliefs that he claimed posed a threat to democracy. In comments released ahead of a speech to the conservative Policy Exchange think tank on Monday evening, Hall argued new laws could be brought in to 'save democracy from itself'. He said: 'If I were a foreign intelligence officer of course I would meddle in separatism, whether Scottish independence or independence of overseas territories or Brexit. (Image: Jeff Moore/PA Wire) 'I would encourage extreme forms of environmentalism, hoping that policies generated would damage my adversaries' economy or at least sow discord or hopelessness.' Hall suggested that hostile foreign states may sponsor Islamist MPs and use social media as a 'delightful playground for wedge issues'. His planned speech, first reported in The Times, will also see him claim that foreign agents could be pushing trans rights on social media and questioned whether the Government may need to adopt 'a Cold War mentality that sniffs out subversion'. READ MORE: Scotland 'absorbed into England' by Acts of Union, says top legal expert Hall was expected to say: 'If I were a foreign intelligence officer, of course I would ensure that the UK hated itself and its history. That the very definition of woman should be put into question, and that masculinity would be presented as toxic. That white people should be ashamed and non-white people aggrieved. I would promote antisemitism within politics. 'My intention would be to cause both immediate and long-term damage to the national security of the UK by exploiting the freedom and openness of the UK by providing funds, exploiting social media, and entryism.' Pro-Russia groups find affinity with 'lone actors' posing as 'protectors of Christian civilisation' who argue that Russia is the 'true defender of crumbling western civilisation', Hall says. He adds that foreign agents may already be using 'sextortion' tactics to obtain kompromat to blackmail people and said that current content moderation policies on social media are 'never going to sufficiently address the unprecedented access that the internet accords to impressionable minds'. He asks whether it may be necessary to 'bring forward a law, in the interests of national security, banning extremism or subversion'. It is not the first time that it's been claimed foreign actors are behind some social media activity in favour of Scottish independence. The UK Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee found in 2020 that there was 'credible open source commentary suggesting that Russia undertook influence campaigns in relation to the Scottish independence referendum in 2014'.
