The supreme court is set to rule on whether Scottish parliament can hold a second vote without the approval of Westminster
If you want to know more about the legal issues at the heart of the Scottish independence referendum issue, the House of Commons library has produced an excellent 102-page briefing on the subject.
Here’s an extract from what is says on the issue of whether the court will decide it can rule on this matter given the Scottish parliament’s referendum bill has not been passed yet.
Precedents suggest courts dislike “hypothetical” or “premature” references. In this case, the Supreme Court is being asked to consider a Bill which has not yet been introduced to the Scottish Parliament, and which could be amended after it has. This is unprecedented. As Professor Armstrong has observed, the question for the Supreme Court will be “whether it is right to give an answer to the question posed at a pre-legislative stage as opposed to a subsequent pre-enactment stage” …
In the Keatings case, Lord Carloway, Lord President of the Court of Session, said a “draft Bill has no legal status. If a Bill is introduced, it may or may not be in the form which is contained in the draft. No matter what its initial form, it may be amended.”
There’s no better way to rile the Scots than to tell them they can’t have a democratic choice on their own future that does tend to upset people, and rightly so. Because regardless of people’s views on the independence question, whether for it or against it, the vast, vast majority of people in Scotland believe that Scotland’s a nation, nations have the right of self determination, and basically it should be up to the Scots to decide whether they become independent or not.
To be told they can’t do it by a court or for that matter a government in London, there’s no better way to galvanise Scottish opinion.
The supreme court is set to rule on whether Scottish parliament can hold a second vote without the approval of WestminsterIf you want to know more about the legal issues at the heart of the Scottish independence referendum issue, the House of Commons library has produced an excellent 102-page briefing on the subject.Here’s an extract from what is says on the issue of whether the court will decide it can rule on this matter given the Scottish parliament’s referendum bill has not been passed yet.Precedents suggest courts dislike “hypothetical” or “premature” references. In this case, the Supreme Court is being asked to consider a Bill which has not yet been introduced to the Scottish Parliament, and which could be amended after it has. This is unprecedented. As Professor Armstrong has observed, the question for the Supreme Court will be “whether it is right to give an answer to the question posed at a pre-legislative stage as opposed to a subsequent pre-enactment stage” …In the Keatings case, Lord Carloway, Lord President of the Court of Session, said a “draft Bill has no legal status. If a Bill is introduced, it may or may not be in the form which is contained in the draft. No matter what its initial form, it may be amended.”There’s no better way to rile the Scots than to tell them they can’t have a democratic choice on their own future that does tend to upset people, and rightly so. Because regardless of people’s views on the independence question, whether for it or against it, the vast, vast majority of people in Scotland believe that Scotland’s a nation, nations have the right of self determination, and basically it should be up to the Scots to decide whether they become independent or not. To be told they can’t do it by a court or for that matter a government in London, there’s no better way to galvanise Scottish opinion. Continue reading…
