THIS afternoon John Swinney FM will receive a personal delivery of an open letter signed by a broad spectrum of political reformers but fostered by the independence movement to whom he has an at least theoretical affiliation. The letter, to be delivered in person at 3pm at Holyrood, and shared with any vaguely interested journalists, draws attention to one of what is arguably one further dereliction of duty of both the UK and the recent SNP “government”.

The citizens of Scotland have been deprived of the full exercise of civil and political rights, to which they have been entitled but denied since 1976, despite the expressed disapproval of both national and international organisations championing human rights. It sounds improbable but is nevertheless less true.

READ MORE: Ash Regan: The task of shaping Alex Salmond's legacy lies with all of us

In 1976 the UK Government accepted the and ratified the recommendations of of the UN-sponsored International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) that allowed for increased direct participation in the legislative process to signatory national populations. Included within these were the rights to referendums if supported by public petition on matters of grave public importance, eg changes to constitutions or even in certain cases committing those people to war potentially.

I hear cries that “foreign policy is reserved, and if a majority at Westminster wants to fight foreign wars then Scottish lads must go! “To those who espouse this abdication of responsibility for our own youth, can I draw their attention to the Scotland Act of 1998 which clearly states that the devolved executive/government is permitted and indeed expected to enact international treaties into their jurisdiction – in this case Scots Law – if the UK has signed international agreements?

READ MORE: Starting with the fitba, let’s reinvigorate Scots pride

Aside from these important technicalities, I am sure all thinking observers would agree that given the lamentable state of the social economic and moral fabric of neoliberal Scotland, and the complicity and complacency of the the majority of our political self-servants, that the people need the active mechanisms of redress and restraint that popular sovereignty and direct democratic machinery affords.

These are best provided by a second scrutinising house peopled by artisans, labourers, professional experts of known probity, sportsmen, artists and public and health service groups with the option of referendum in emergencies.

Watch this space, “times they are a changin”.

Dr Andrew Docherty
Selkirk

THE article about the European Movement in Scotland (Pro-EU group say Labour giving ‘no credible answer’ on single market, Oct 16) is a little puzzling. The Chair of the European Movement in Scotland (EMiS) is quoted as highlighting the desire of the majority of Scots to be in the EU, but why is the focus of the piece entirely on the UK Labour government’s policy? Why is there no recognition that there are clearly two possible routes that Scotland could take to (re)join the EU?

Indeed, the party of government at Holyrood, the SNP, are committed to seeking EU membership for Scotland as soon as possible upon gaining independence, as are the Greens.

READ MORE: If the YSI is the future of the SNP then the future looks bright

The quotes in the article are rightly critical of Labour’s rejection of calls for UK participation in Erasmus and other EU schemes, but in focusing solely on that UK Government stance, EMiS neglects the Scottish government’s very positive approach to the EU. The organisation’s stated aim (on its website) is to promote “Scotland’s fullest possible participation” in the EU: “fullest possible participation” surely means nothing less than membership, and that is what the majority of Scots want (I expect Prof John Curtice will remind everyone of the statistics at the EMiS annual dinner!).

Trying to get specific deals, whether on the single market, immigration, youth mobility, etc, may help reduce some of the Brexit damage, but will never restore the full benefits of EU membership which have been undemocratically wrenched from us.

So, EMiS, there’s nothing wrong with you lobbying the UK Government to promote bit-by-bit gradual mitigation of Brexit harms in the hope that the UK will eventually see sense and rejoin. But if you are sincere in your aim of Scotland’s fullest possible participation in the EU, you need to at the very least acknowledge the existence of the “other route” too, ie via independence.

As a national, well-resourced Scottish pro-EU campaign body, you owe it to your members and the wider public to offer better-quality political analysis in relation to Scotland, the UK and the EU. Your neglect of one of Scotland’s two possible routes to the EU is a strange omission, and disappointing. Is there an anti-independence bias in EMiS?

Morag Williamson
Edinburgh