ALTHOUGH I generally agree with the extensive sympathetic discussion of Catalonia among supporters of Scottish independence, it serves virtually no practical purpose.
No country has expressed the slightest solidarity, and where any has come out it has been on the side of Madrid. The EU’s response has been even more mortifying than required by the treaty provision which enjoins members to respect the constitutions of every other member and not interfere in such matters, and the attempted breakaway is widely and unquestioningly described as illegal by governments and the leading media, parroting Madrid.
I am not aware of any attempt by Catalonia itself to rebut the charge of unconstitutionality, but until that is overturned, Catalan independence will never be achieved (notwithstanding the theoretical primacy of the right to self-determination).
The sole part of the Spanish constitution on which the charge is founded is a tiny morsel of pure candy floss: “The constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation, the common and indivisible homeland of all Spaniards.”
It is self-evident that Catalan secession cannot possibly amount to dissolution of the unity of the Spanish nation (which would still exist) and at least questionable that the loss of a minor portion of the territory of the Spanish state can be equated with division of whatever the wooly concept of “homeland” means.
As long as Madrid owns the issue, it is their political but fanciful interpretation which will rule. In order to get it in front of an impartial panel, I hope that those who have been charged with rebellion will appeal their inevitable convictions to the hilt, to beyond Spain. What might the European Court of Human Rights say about it, for instance? And might the true reason for Madrid having abandoned its extradition request for Puigdemont be fear of a Belgian judge lifting the Spanish hem to expose the cloven hoof of oppression?
Alan Crocket
Motherwell
YESTERDAY, Theresa May emphasised her support for Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy as he arrived at Downing Street for talks, adding that the countries were working together to counter international terrorism.
Why are they trying to link a peaceful and democratic process with international terrorism?
May said: “I would ... like to reiterate my support for Prime Minister Rajoy on Catalonia. It is important that the rule of law is upheld and that the Spanish constitution is respected.”
So she supports the use of government-sanctioned violence against peaceful democratic voting? She also supports the political interventions compromising Spanish court autonomy by Rajoy’s party and supporters, which is a direct abuse of his office against the free will of the Catalonian people and the democratic status of Spain as a whole.
The Spanish constitution only has validity over those who chose to live under its rule. If people are forced to live under its authority then it becomes a dictat, meaning the Spanish Government would become an occupational dictatorship in Catalonia.
Rajoy said that without democracy we would simply be going back to the dark ages and that constitutional arrangements needed to be safeguarded
So which is it: democracy, or forced constitutional arrangements? He chose the latter when he refused to legitimise a referendum which had the support of more than half the population and then criminalised the procedure and the people who exercised their right to self-determination.
Rajoy chose the path of a dictator and May supports him?
T Donnelly
via thenational.scot
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here