Trying to figure out WTF is going on One of the questions I am most commonly asked is why the first item on the Manifesto for Independence is repudiation of the Section 30 process - the process used to authorise the 2014 referendum. This involved an instrument known as an Order in Council to transfer legislative competence temporarily and conditionally to the Scottish Parliament so it could legislate for a consultative and non-self-executing referendum that would have no legal or constitutional effect. In other words, a glorified opinion poll that could not possibly lead to independence because it left the ultimate interpretation and disposition of the result in the hands of the British state. And there you have one exceptionally good reason to repudiate the Section 30 process. If the pro-independence side were to win such a referendum, the British government would make lots of noises about respecting the result while doing nothing to implement it. They would not accept it as the final word on the matter. Why should they? They would be under no obligation to do so. A Section 30 referendum cannot be other than consultative and non-self-executing. It cannot have any legal or constitutional effect. So, why would the British state behave as if a Yes vote put them under some sort of obligation? Some say the Brits could not ignore a Yes vote. That they would come under pressure from the international community. That ignoring the result would be blatantly anti-democratic. In fact, the international community wouldn't take much notice. They would regard it as an internal matter for the UK government. Foreign governments with a grudge might make some noise. But solely in the hope of embarrassing the Brits and not in support of Scotland. We are talking here about a government which got into power by egregiously lying to the public about everything. A government which openly supports and colludes with brutal genocide in order that its corporate clients can grow ever fatter. The notion that this is a government which might bow to some moral imperative is naive and risible. It would be an entirely different story if the anti-independence side were to win a Section 30 referendum. In that case, it would be hailed as the legitimate expression of the will of Scotland's people and the final word on the constitutional issue for an undefined number of generations. We would be told we'd had our second referendum and now should just shut up and assume the position for a jaggy stick shagging. A smear of lubrication might be permitted as a token of the Brits' love for Scotland's people. So, there you have one reason for repudiating the Section 30 process. Another reason is alluded to in the text of the Manifesto for Independence.
The Section 30 process is, or exemplifies, a constraint on our right of self-determination which is deprecated in international law. See paragraph 5 of UN Declaration 1514, Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples:
The requirement to seek consent from the 'administering power' is a clear breach of the prohibition on "conditions or reservations". As is the fact that the British state asserts the right to impose caveats and limitations on its consent. It has always puzzled me why Scotland's political elite was obsessed with the legality and constitutionality of what the Scottish Government was doing or proposing, while never questioning the legality and constitutionality of what the British state was doing. Yet another reason for repudiating the Section 30 process is that even to accede to its validity is to deny the sovereignty of Scotland's people. That the people of Scotland are sovereign is both a constitutional fact and an essential, inviolable principle. The very existence of Section 30 of the Scotland Act is an insult to the people of Scotland. One of many in that piece of legislation. For the First Minister to request a Section 30 order is an act of heinous treachery. Implicit in such a request is an acceptance of the sovereignty of the parliament of England as Britain. There cannot be two sovereign entities. There cannot be two ultimate authorities. Therefore, validation of parliamentary sovereignty cannot be other than denial of the sovereignty of Scotland's people. We come now to two related reasons for explicitly rejecting the Section 30 process and doing so now. So long as the Scottish Government accepts the legitimacy of the Section 30 process, there is a risk that the British might spring a Section 30 order on them. They might unilaterally present an Order in Council granting the referendum that the Scottish Government has been demanding. They would attach all manner of provisos and caveats to this consent, of course. And a time limit. The Scottish Government would be forced to accept a referendum that could not be won by the forces of liberation, and which would be meaningless even if the Yes side did win. Finally, the Section 30 process must be immediately repudiated because it represents a potential glitch for the #ScottishUDI process which is the only process thus far identified which will lead to the restoration of Scotland's independence. Look at the third point on the Manifesto for independence.
Should the Briish state choose to challenge the Scottish Parliament as it asserts legislative competence, one of their possible arguments would be that there is an existing method by which the people of Scotland might exercise their right of self-determination. Namely, the Section 30 process. The Scottish side would have to argue that this process was not acceptable. Which would be rather difficult if the other side were able to cite countless instances of the FM and others referring to the Section 30 process as the 'gold standard' of democracy. The Section 30 process must be repudiated immediately because allowing it to remain on the table is a hindrance to Scotland's cause and a potential lifeline for those striving to keep Scotland under the heel of the Union. You're currently a free subscriber to Peter A Bell. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
Sunday, 13 April 2025
Why the Section 30 process must be repudiated
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
INSTAs vs. INSPOs: curated inspiration vs. lived inspiration
… the difference between looking and living ... ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏...
-
thealchemistspottery posted: " "I shall pass through this world but once.If therefore, there be any kindness I can sho...
-
Stimulate the body to calm the mind Cross Fit for the Mind The Newsletter that Changes the Minds of High Performers If overstimulation is th...
No comments:
Post a Comment