Supreme Court judgment renders Scottish democracy an illusion

Suffice to say this judgment engenders abject contempt for a Supreme Court which has demonstrated itself as little more than an instrument of Westminster’s undemocratic suppression of our fundamental rights and, let’s not pretend otherwise, the actions of fascism rather than the UK’s falsely claimed democracy.

Scottish democracy has just been rendered an illusion – this decision confirms our colonial status – and powerless to exercise our democratic right to determine our future.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon takes stage to address indy rally in Edinburgh

Westminster may think it has won a chocolate watch with this judgment, but isn’t the opposite the reality?

A major constitutional crisis has now formally been precipitated. And it’s long overdue to seize the initiative and exacerbate that crisis politically in the hope that this obviates the potential to descend to the depths of previous struggles to throw off British colonial rule.

It’s been suggested we wait for the next Westminster election and make it a single-issue election about independence. Why should we wait? Instead, why don’t our Westminster MPs resign en-bloc now and precipitate that single-issue election? We don’t have to wait for a full election because what happens in the English shires and beyond is irrelevant to the process.

And why don’t our MSPs also simultaneously resign en-masse and precipitate similar Holyrood by-elections on the single issue of an independence referendum? It matters not if the few Unionists follow suit, the message would still be driven home.

The effect of this would be to widen the debate in the full glare of international publicity, and it would be humiliating and debilitating for UK credibility in the international community. It would be a warning that Scottish independence is irresistible.

We need action, and we need it now. Independence will not be given willingly; Westminster has too much to lose. We have to take it back. Now!

Jim Taylor
Edinburgh

IN introducing the Supreme Court decision on the referendum bill, Lord Reed said: “A lawfully held referendum would have important consequences relating to the Union and the UK Parliament. Its outcome would possess the authority, in [a] constitution[al] and political culture founded upon democracy, of a democratic expression of the view of the Scottish electorate. It would either strengthen or weaken the democratic legitimacy of the Union and of the UK Parliament’s sovereignty over Scotland, depending on which view prevailed, and it would either support or undermine the democratic credentials of the independence movement.”

Lord Reed needs to consider that these consequences arise now that there is a denial of any opportunity for lawful democratic expression. It is no good lifting his skirts.

READ MORE: Next steps to Scottish independence after Supreme Court ruling

The Scottish Government need to dissolve the Scottish Parliament at the first opportunity, likely being the consequences of the non-passage of a budget bill. A de-facto referendum must be held at the subsequent Holyrood election where 16- and 17-year-olds have been enfranchised. A Westminster election is second prize.

If a Section 30 does not automatically follow a majority vote for independence-supporting parties, then we are on the road to some form of a unilateral declaration of independence. If a right to self-determination is recognised by the United Nations for “colonies” then there must be no obstacle on a similar route for an independent Scotland.

Derek Lloyd
Renfrew