Judges reject SNP appeal for referendum
Scotland is not a colony nor are Scots oppressed, Supreme Court rules in unanimous decision
SCOTLAND is not a British colony nor are its people oppressed, the country’s highest court said yesterday as it ruled Nicola Sturgeon does not have the power to hold her own independence referendum.
The Supreme Court delivered a scathing rejection of Scottish National Party submissions in which it compared its independence campaign to Kosovo’s fight for self-determination after years of bloody ethnic conflict. Ms Sturgeon’s party also argued Scots had an “inalienable” right to self-determination, citing a case in the Canadian Supreme Court concerning Quebec.
But Lord Reed of Allermuir, the UK court’s Scottish president, said the case only applied in former colonies or in cases where people were oppressed, for example by being forced to live under foreign military rule.
Ms Sturgeon insisted she respected the ruling but argued that it confirmed that the UK was no longer a “voluntary Union and partnership”.
She accused the UK Government of “democracy denial”, a position she said was “unsustainable” despite polls showing a majority of Scots oppose her plan for an Oct 2023 referendum.
Ms Sturgeon also suggested she would have a mandate to open negotiations with the UK Government after the next general election if the SNP and other pro-independence parties won the majority of the popular vote in Scotland. She argued a new prime minister could “strike a more democratic tone” by allowing her a vote.
But as independence supporters gathered at rallies across Scotland, Alex Salmond accused her of leading the movement “down a complete blind alley”.
And the Prime Minister and Sir
Keir Starmer made their positions clear that a general election could not be used to break up the UK. The SNP was allowed to make written submissions to the court, as long as they did not repeat the case made by Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain, Ms Sturgeon’s most senior law officer. But the court unanimously rejected its arguments.
The five justices all concluded the First Minister’s draft Referendum Bill would go beyond Holyrood powers as the Union and the sovereignty of the UK Parliament are matters reserved to Westminster.
Ms Sturgeon admitted there was little prospect of Mr Sunak dropping his opposition to a referendum and pledged to find another “democratic, lawful and constitutional means by which the Scottish people can express their will”.
She said the next UK election would be “the first and most obvious opportunity to seek … a de facto referendum” and added a special party conference in the new year would agree the details.
But Sir Keir’s spokesman insisted: “We will not be doing any deals with a party that wants to break up the United Kingdom. That is not our position.”
Mr Sunak welcomed the “clear and definitive ruling from the Supreme Court”, telling the Commons the people wanted the UK and Scottish governments “to be working on fixing the major challenges we collectively face”.
It cannot have come as a great surprise to Nicola Sturgeon that the Supreme Court has ruled another referendum on Scottish independence unlawful unless agreed by the UK Parliament. The First Minister voiced her disappointment but few imagined the provisions of the Scotland Act 1998 would allow Holyrood to legislate for a unilateral plebiscite aimed at breaking up the Union.
She might have been taken aback by the emphatic nature of the judgment, reached unanimously by the five judges; but Ms Sturgeon and her SNP government sought legal clarity and now they have it. The First Minister said she respected the court and would always be guided by a commitment to democracy and the rule of law in seeking independence. But she is never slow to turn a setback into an opportunity.
She said the judgment had given the lie to the view that the Union is a voluntary association of sovereign nations, since Scotland could not decide its own future without the say-so of Westminster. This point was hammered home by a succession of SNP MPS in the House of Commons later.
Ms Sturgeon is now intending to seek a mandate for another referendum at a general election due by January 2025. This is a high-risk strategy for the Nationalists since single-issue campaigns are hard, if not impossible, to manage. Many voters will make decisions on other matters, not least the Nationalists’ record in office.
With everything else going on in the world, voters might wonder why the SNP remains fixated on independence. It serves as a useful distraction from the failures of Ms Sturgeon’s government, which has been in office for 12 years. It suits the separatists to blame Westminster for everything rather than be accountable for their own shortcomings. They have significant powers to run their own affairs yet persist in stoking resentment against the UK Parliament to mask the mess they have made of health, education and law and order.
Ms Sturgeon avers that the Scotland Act has stymied Scotland’s right to vote for selfdetermination, but that is patently not true, as there was a referendum in 2014, accepted then by the SNP as a once-in-a-generation decision. The First Minister conceded that an absolute majority of votes at the next election is a prerequisite for seeking another referendum (though even that is not a mandate if turnout is low). Unionists in Scotland need to spend the next two years making sure the SNP does not achieve it.