If international law route to indy is easy, why hasn't it been tried?

There is no mechanism or higher authority that has any actual sway over Westminster if they choose to ignore external direction. How many states have been able to achieve independence by the use of international law? If it was that easy, why has no-one else tried it? Look at Catalonia for a recent example. I’m not arguing against such a process, but no-one has produced any evidence or legal opinion that it would or could work. How many lawyers, who clearly will be well aware of the limitations of international law, have ever proposed that as the key?

READ MORE: Who is sovereign in Scotland – King Charles, or the Scottish people?

The difficulty is that there is no mechanism by which international authorities can impose a decision on sovereign governments, which sadly Holyrood is not yet. And even if a case could be constructed and pursued, it still needs an internationally recognised and constituted set of representatives reflecting majority opinion to bring it. This means in our case that attempts to undermine or split a Holyrood and Westminster vote are very counterproductive. If such action could be brought then it may be a means of forcing a formal referendum to test opinion, but what happens if we again fail to gain a majority?

It is very easy to sit on the sidelines demanding someone else does something, and then complain after that when someone has looked at and considered whether it is feasible or not and realises that it isn’t. As with all negotiations, it requires both sides to engage in debate. If either side refuses to engage then stalemate exists. And even when we get yet another SNP majority at Westminster and our negotiators start negotiating, what do we do if they just ignore us? We don’t really have any mechanism to bring actual pressure to bear. We can’t even divert tax collections without their consent as the system is not under our control, and even then we would need a substantial majority of our fellow citizens to support unilateral action. All the myriad states that have gained independence from Westminster have all had substantial majorities in favour. We have to work together constructively to achieve that.

READ MORE: 10 key moments from Humza Yousaf's first 100 days as First Minister

If international law was easy would we not already have gone down this route? If it is worth exploring formally then I welcome it, but beware any negative conclusion. In the meantime, we must still apply pressure through our current representation, and we still need to convince a fair majority of our citizens to support independence. If that could be demonstrated then we will get somewhere, but while Westminster encourages division and misdirection, we won’t. We need to stop doing their work for them. Fundamentally also, our SNP government and party cannot be seen to be condoning or even encouraging anything not within the law as it stands.

Nick Cole
Meigle, Perthshire

WHEN Nick Cole tells us that disgruntled activists don’t have a workable alternative to the FM’s plan (Letters, Jun 26), shouldn’t he be asking the pertinent question why those activists are disgruntled in the first place?

Isn’t it because voters have delivered a string of popular mandates in elections to both parliaments and yet his party has failed to capitalise on them?

I suspect Cole and his ilk fail to understand omelettes can’t be made without first cracking the egg.

READ MORE: Labour in their current form are just like the Tories only less honest

Doesn’t highlighting and confusing the issue with the surmountable complexities of disengaging Scotland from the Union serve no purpose other than to dissuade those tentative voters fearful of sanctioning change?

For me, the first step must be to commit to being independent. And I agree with Graeme McCormick (Long Letter, Jun 26) that the key to making that commitment is through our Westminster MPs elected under the auspices of the internationally recognised Act of Union itself. It is only through acting in accordance with that mechanism that we can legitimately take back our country.

And if that results in political confrontation then isn’t that entirely at the behest of our biggest UK “partner” exposing the actuality of its real standing as a colonial master occupying its foreign territory of Scotland, which it dominates and in doing so denies our right to democratic expression?

READ MORE: Orkney council to look at proposals to leave UK and become Norwegian territory

So, let’s make the coming General Election solely about independence. Let’s get all the issues out in the open and use the hustings to highlight Scotland’s future and potential, and explain how it will be delivered and in what timescale.

And let’s leave rUK to flounder in the futile choice of which colour of Tory party they want to try to drain the political swamp that is Brexit UK.

Let’s convene our democratically elected MPs at the old Scottish parliament in the High Street – the location of the 1707 calumny – assert our claim of right, vote to repeal the Act of Union and begin the transition that Westminster would find it internationally ruinous to obstruct.

With 62 territories having already gone down this route, doesn’t Westminster have all the experience necessary to ensure the smooth transition for its new neighbour and ally?

Jim Taylor
Edinburgh