Let me repeat a very thought-provoking post on the subject of Scottish Independence made by Amaryllis Elphick: Heart says independence, head says union, but this is all arbitrary smoke and mirrors stuff. My understanding is: The referendum was granted with a number of conditions and limitations. 1. For any action to be required, the result of the ballot must be ‘decisive’. With a near 50/50 split likely it seems get out clause 1 will be easy to employ. 2. Any action that follows the result must ‘be in the best interests of the people of Scotland’. Any change or no change can each be argued as meeting that criterion. Indeed they have been so argued by both the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ campaigns. 3. It turns out that the UK parliament does not have the power to dissolve the Act of Union as Parliament’s powers derive from that same Act and not vice versa. The Act of Union enjoys the status of an International Treaty. Just as the International Treaty of Human Rights cannot be modified by the UK Parliament alone, so the Act of Union cannot be modified by the UK Parliament alone. What is not clear is who the parties are exactly who jointly do have the necessary power. All in all it is trough time for Lawyers specialising in constitutional and international law. Fortunately or unfortunately, living south of the boarder, I will not have to make any choice and can sit comfortably on the sidelines throwing metaphorical tomatoes at whoever I chose!
Posted on: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:32:45 +0000