This week we’ve had the bizarre occurrence of the SNP formally submitting a request to intervene in the Indyref2 Supreme Court case, even though Scotland’s top law officer, the Lord Advocate, has already put forward the Scottish Government’s written case.
To recap, the Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain has referred a prospective bill on a referendum to the UK Supreme Court so that judges can rule on whether Holyrood has the power to unilaterally hold a vote. In a 51-page written submission to the court, Bain argues a referendum, which Nicola Sturgeon wants to see take place in October 2023, would merely demonstrate the views of the Scottish people regarding secession from the UK and would not have the legal outcome of ending the union. Being purely advisory, and having no legal effect, legislation unilaterally enabling a referendum is, therefore, not of a kind that it ‘relates to’ the reserved matter of the union, goes the argument.
That was in June. Now, the SNP has requested a formal intervention in the case, with the party’s lawyers submitting a lengthy application to make their argument. The SNP wishes to be allocated time to make oral and written submissions when court proceedings take place in October. It seems the party is either worried that the Lord Advocate’s case is too even-handed and wishes to sway the judges with its own arguments, or it views the court case and attendant publicity as a useful campaigning platform.
The SNP’s application to be formally heard reiterates the Lord Advocate’s arguments. But it goes further by stating that a ruling in favour of Holyrood having the power to hold a referendum should happen because of the fundamentals of ‘self-determination’ – that Scotland, by definition of being a nation, must have the right to unilaterally hold a referendum on secession from the union.
Citing international law as backing its arguments, it quotes part of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by the UK in 1976:
‘All peoples have the right of self-determination.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Don't miss out
Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.
UNLOCK ACCESSAlready a subscriber? Log in