Independence ‘is same belief as a religion’
Judge’s ruling backs Nat’s claims
BELIEF in independence is a ‘philosophical belief’ similar to a religion and is protected under equality laws, an employment tribunal has ruled.
Chris McEleny, SNP group leader on Inverclyde Council, is pursuing his former Ministry of Defence (MoD) employer, claiming he was unfairly targeted over his support for the cause.
Following a preliminary hearing, Judge Frances Eccles was persuaded Mr McEleny’s backing for independence ‘has a sufficiently similar cogency to a religious belief... to qualify as a philosophical belief’.
It could thus be relied upon
‘Genuinely held and important’
as a ‘protected characteristic’ for claiming discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
Mr McEleny’s case, which will now go to a full hearing, centres on his treatment by his former employer when he announced his candidacy for the SNP depute leadership role in 2016.
He was working as an electrician at the MoD munitions site in Beith, Ayrshire, and said that around the time of the leadership hustings he was told his security clearance had been revoked and he was suspended.
He says he was interviewed by national security officials on issues including his pro-independence views and quit claiming he was unfairly targeted for his stance on leaving the UK and his sup- port for the ‘social democratic values’ of the SNP.
During legal proceedings he cited a previous case, Grainger plc v Nicholson, which focused on a staff member who believed he was made redundant over his belief in climate change, and included written submissions from former first minister Alex Salmond.
Mr McEleny argued his views were ‘genuinely held’ and ‘serious, cohesive and important’.
Judge Eccles noted: ‘The claimant was clear in his evidence he does not believe in independence because it will necessarily lead to improved economic and social conditions for people living in Scotland – it is a fundamental belief in the right of Scotland to national sovereignty.’
But lawyer acting for the MoD said there was a significant difference in law between a political opinion or affiliation and philosophical belief, arguing; ‘It does not have a similar status or cogency to a religious belief.’
It was also argued that support for Scottish independence and the SNP does not extend far enough beyond Scotland to warrant the status of a philosophical belief, and it would have ‘no substantial impact on the lives of citizens in, for example Tanzania, Peru or India’.
But Judge Eccles found sovereignty and ‘self-determination’ are ‘weighty and substantial aspects of human life’.
Furthermore, the judge said that she was persuaded that ‘how a country should be governed is sufficiently serious to amount to a philosophical belief ’. Lawyer Aamer Anwar, speaking on behalf of Mr McEleny, said: ‘This legal precedent now enables my client to pursue a claim for direct discrimination alleging that he was discriminated against because of this belief.’
An MoD spokesman said t: ‘It would be inappropriate to comment on details of an employment tribunal.’
‘It does not have a similar status’