THE Scottish Government has said the independence campaigner trying to prove in court that Holyrood does not need Westminster’s permission to hold indyref2 is not the appropriate person to bring about such action.
The Times has obtained a copy of the closed record of the court in the People’s Action on Section 30 case, which sets out the legal arguments of all participants.
Forward as One’s Martin Keatings has brought the case forward on behalf of the independence movement after crowdfunding tens of thousands of pounds to fund it.
The activist wants to prove that a new independence referendum can go ahead without the Prime Minister accepting a Section 30 request.
READ MORE: Scottish Government pulls out of Section 30 People’s Action court case
In a joint response the Scottish Government and Lord Advocate say Keatings is not the right person to pursue this action because he is not an MSP.
They said: “No member of the Scottish parliament has introduced a bill to legislate for the holding of a referendum on Scottish independence absent such an agreement.
“It is not for the pursuer to attempt to stand in the shoes of those parliamentarians.”
The UK Government agreed, but added that it is not within the Scottish Parliament’s abilities to hold another referendum on independence.
The news of the Scottish Government’s response to the case comes during a tense time for the independence movement. There are splits regarding how to move ahead now polls show between 53-55% support for independence.
The First Minister has said that the SNP manifesto will make a commitment to indyref2, and that this will secure a mandate if the SNP achieve a majority at next year’s Holyrood election. So far opinion polls show this is a likely scenario.
However, Boris Johnson has ruled out agreeing to another Scottish independence referendum.
SNP ministers and the Lord Advocate told the Court of Session: “There is no impending decision for members of the Scottish Parliament in relation to which of those parliamentarians require the assistance of the court. No bill has been introduced into the Scottish Parliament on a referendum on Scottish independence and no vote is imminent.”
They went on to say that it was “not tenable for a UK government simply to refuse to engage with the process” of another vote on the issue.
While the constitution is a reserved matter, legal advice issued by Aidan O’Neill QC in January suggested that there are “good arguments” for the Scottish Parliament having the power to hold indyref2.
Balfour and Manson made the submission on Keatings's behalf, arguing that the “uncertainty in the law on this issue undermines democracy”.
Scottish ministers have now withdrawn from the People’s Action on Section 30 proceedings, but the Lord Advocate remains a party to the case.
A Scottish Government official told the newspaper: “The Scottish Government remains of the firm belief that the people of Scotland have the right to choose their own future and is determined to make that happen.
"We have no further comment at this time while the matter is ongoing.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel