THE days following the death of the Queen required a moment for reflection. If her supposed tradition of being apolitical was to have been followed, then this might have been the time for politicians to take a very temporary back seat. Due process might have been enough, at least for a few days. And yet nothing like that has happened.

Instead, few events can have been quite as political as the Queen’s death and the subsequent accession of King Charles III. You would not, of course, know this from watching the BBC, or from reading the obsequious unionist media. There, blanket coverage of supposedly massed crowds (many of which look remarkably small) has been used to justify endless talk of a person who lived without apparent fault.

READ MORE: First Minister marks 'sad' moment Queen leaves Balmoral

But there was something altogether more sinister going on, simultaneously. At a time of national crisis, which Liz Truss was very obviously not coming to terms with only hours before the Queen died, Parliament has been suspended until after the state funeral, when it might then be suspended again for party conferences.

It is as if the very process of government, of which the Crown is a supposed fundamental part, can be put on hold for the death of the monarch when the whole claimed point about hereditary monarchy is that there is an immediate succession so that life goes on. It does not feel that way right now. Instead, it seems that democracy is on hold just when we need it, which Liz Truss no doubt finds very useful indeed. Nor did anything about the accession feel in the slightest bit democratic.

The Privy Council, largely made up of the great and not-so-good who have at some time made it to office as a Cabinet minister in Westminster, was assembled in London to be told that Prince Charles was to be made King. His approval for actions was sought, but the Privy Councillors were never asked for their opinion on this proposal: democracy, it seemed had no part in all this.

Nor was our consent sought to the suggestion made in the proclamation that Charles is now our new liege lord. A liege lord is a feudal role, and his appointment to that new position makes all of us his vassals, meaning we are people living under his protection, owing him a debt paid in homage and duty. Well thank you very much, but I do not agree to take on that role.

As bad as this was, the plan that Liz Truss might have accompanied the new King on tour this week when he visits Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for services of remembrance for his mother was worse. There is something deeply sinister about this. I am aware Downing Street says she would merely be there to “support him”, but he is vastly more experienced than she is. As important, each of these countries has its own political leadership and national churches and traditions – none require involvement from London in their national reflections. The indication that Truss sought to ignore devolution is writ large all over this.

As the reign of Charles III begins, his rushed accession is being used as a cover for the suspension of democracy, the subjugation of the people of the UK and the giving of offence to Scotland and Wales, who do not need a new Duke of Rothesay or Prince of Wales respectively, roles to which one Englishman (the Duke of Cambridge) was simultaneously appointed on Friday. And all those things happened without most of the press paying the slightest attention, which is profoundly worrying.

Our rights are being eroded and those in power not only seem not to care, but to actively acquiesce in this. Scotland should take note.