THE UK Government is due to start a Supreme Court challenge over two bills unanimously passed by the Scottish Parliament.
In March, Holyrood passed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, which would incorporate a UN treaty into Scottish law.
Scottish Secretary Alister Jack raised concerns the legislation could potentially put legal duties on UK Ministers, which would be outside the remit of the Scottish Government’s powers.
Before the passage of the bill, Jack wrote to deputy first minister John Swinney asking for changes to ensure it did not apply to legislation passed by the UK Government or UK ministers. When the changes were not made, Jack said he would refer the issue to the Supreme Court.
READ MORE: What Scottish bills are the Tories challenging in the Supreme Court and why?
The legal bid, starting on Monday and brought by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland, will evaluate whether certain parts of the bills are outside of the power of the Scottish legislature.
The European Charter of Local Self-Government (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, which was also passed unanimously by MSPs, was also referred over similar concerns.
The UK’s highest court will now consider the bills, which incorporate international treaties that the UK is a signatory into Scottish law.
Over two days, the Supreme Court will also consider whether the bills would allow the Scottish courts extensive powers to scrutinise legalisation passed by the UK Parliament.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon says there is a case for reform of dual role of Lord Advocate
Scotland’s Lord Advocate, the position newly held by Dorothy Bain QC, and Wales’ Counsel General are responding to the legal action.
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon previously called the move “morally repugnant” as the SNP accused the UK Government of trying to strike down a law to protect the rights of children.
However, Jack has repeatedly stated the issue with the legislation is purely based on the possible overreach of the Scottish Parliament, not the contents of either of the Bills.
The case will be heard by five Supreme Court justices and is expected to end on Tuesday, with judgment reserved until a later date.
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