BLACK lives matter. They matter in Minneapolis, where George Floyd was brutally killed by a police officer while others stood idly by. They matter in London, where the police, according to the report of the Macpherson inquiry, mishandled the investigation into the racially motivated murder of Stephen Lawrence.
They even matter in Scotland, where, according to the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights, “everyday racism acts to silence and demean minority ethnic people and reinforces the inequalities they face”.
If we wish to protect those lives – no, not only protect them, but enable them to flourish in an atmosphere of full civic and democratic inclusion – we need to understand the threats and difficulties they face. There is a danger here in blindly importing the rhetoric, iconography, campaigns, and priorities of the United States, or even of London, into Scotland.
Racism exists on both sides of the Atlantic, and north and south of the Border, but it exists quite differently.
In particular, the degree of direct violence, the intersection with religion, class and wealth, and the way in which the historical legacy of slavery was experienced, vary greatly.
So do issues around integration and identity. The policy solutions and priorities might well have to be different too.
It is worth reflecting on the constitutional aspects of this problem and considering the ways in which a new constitution might help.
Of course, a constitution, in itself, cannot do everything. Much comes down to ordinary laws, policies and leadership, as well as cultural shifts.
We also have to beware of trying to engineer “quick fixes”. We’ve been trying to end sectarianism for a long time and at best we can conclude it is a long process of slow change.
Nevertheless, constitutions can help. The constitution can set certain parameters and standards and can establish institutional structures of inclusion and accountability.
There are four areas, in particular, where a new constitution is relevant to this issue: rights, citizenship, policing and scrutiny.
A new constitution would guarantee certain rights, almost certainly based on the European Convention on Human Rights, including freedom from discrimination on grounds such as race or religion.
Yet this is not the limit of what rights can do. Modern constitutions typically include socio-economic rights, promoting equal access to housing, education and employment. In other words, the constitution, by making the state fulfil its obligations to all its citizens, can reinforce polices that overcome not only discrimination but also disadvantage.
A constitution could include open, inclusive provisions on citizenship. The scandal of the Windrush generation (the descendants of Commonwealth Caribbean immigrants who have been removed from the UK in a policy eerily reminiscent of what the National Front used to call “compulsory repatriation”) must never be repeated.
Citizenship and the right of abode should not depend on the laws made and unmade by current parliamentary majorities but be instead anchored in a constitution that offers some protection, at least, from racist populist politicians.
Reforming the police is often part of new constitutional settlements. There are plenty of examples of Commonwealth constitutions in which particular attention is given to policing, particularly in light of the need for trust and legitimacy in a multi-ethnic society.
One standard mechanism is to place the police under the administration of an independent police service commission, the members of which are appointed by the government after consultation with the leader of the opposition.
At the very least, that is supposed to ensure the police are not simply accountable to the government of the day, with its own partisan priorities, but instead serve a wider public interest.
These mechanisms can also be used to promote racial inclusion and prevent any one ethnic group from dominating policing.
In Kenya, for example, it is provided in the constitution that the ‘‘composition of the commissions and offices, taken as a whole, shall reflect the regional and ethnic diversity of the people of Kenya”.
Scrutiny takes place in many forms. Chiefly, in a parliamentary democracy, it takes place in parliament – through the recognised role of the leader of the opposition, question time and the committee system.
To augment this, additional “monitoring and oversight” institutions can also be established in the constitution.
One example is the national inclusion commission in Nepal, which has a constitutional mandate to scrutinise and report on government policies in terms of the impact these policies have on marginalised and minority communities.
What we put into a constitution reflects our values and principles.
The foundational principle of a new constitution must surely be that we are all Jock Tamson’s bairns and that each one of us – regardless of creed or colour – has a right to be treated fairly and with dignity.
It should send a clear signal, more potent than any street name or statue, that racism has no place in Scottish society – then back that up through robust constitutional rights and rules.
This column welcomes questions from readers
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel