There is some serious confusion here. Firstly, "Scotland’s stated constitutional goal" is independence - the dissolution of the Union. It makes no sense to say that the goal is "Popular Sovereignty" because we already have that. That the people of Scotland are sovereign is both a constitutional fact and an abiding principle underpinning Scotland's democracy.
The problem is not that we don't have popular sovereignty, but that the Union imposes 'artificial' constraints on our exercise of that sovereignty. Most notable - and most pertinently - the Union allows the coloniser to limit and/or obstruct the exercise of our right of self-determination. This despite the fact that self-determination is arguably the most fundamental human right.
Correctly stated, Scotland's constitutional goal is the restoration of independence. That is to say, the constitutional status which permits the full and proper exercise of all our rights as the sovereign people of Scotland. In short, liberation.
Stating that the constitutional goal is "Popular Sovereignty" would only make some kind of sense if the term 'popular sovereignty' were being used as a synonym for independence. Which it is not.
(Neither is the term 'self-determination' a synonym for independence, although it is depressingly frequently used as if it was. If independence is what is meant, say independence. Don't get me started on the non-word 'indy'! Reducing a major issue to baby-talk! Ugh!!!)
So, for the moment let us assume that what is being claimed is that incorporating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) into Scottish law would institute in Scotland the "Direct Democracy" which it is further claimed "provides the only tools by which to achieve Scotland’s stated constitutional goal of [independence]".
This is nonsense. For a start, incorporating ICCPR into Scots law might enable us to begin the process of instituting direct democracy. But there being no such thing as magic, this would necessarily be a protracted process. It would require a considerable amount of further legislation. More importantly, it would demand a huge amount of public education. The notion that a Swiss-style system of direct democracy can be introduced in Scotland 'overnight' is just plain ridiculous.
And it does precisely nothing for Scotland's cause. There may be many excellent arguments for incorporating ICCPR into Scottish law, but progressing the restoration of our independence definitely isn't one of them. Incorporating ICCPR into Scottish law leaves the constitutional issue precisely where it is now. Because it does nothing to address the matter of legislative competence.
The day before ICCPR is implemented, the Scottish Parliament has no legislative competence in the area of the constitution because this legislative competence is withheld by the British state using the power afforded it by the Union.
The day after ICCPR is implemented, the Scottish Parliament has no legislative competence in the area of the constitution because this legislative competence is withheld by the British state using the power afforded it by the Union.
NO CHANGE!
The petition also demands that the ICCPR be implemented "prior to the next Holyrood parliamentary election". It is not immediately obvious that this is even possible. What is clear is that it gives the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee a reason/excuse to knock back the petition if that is what they are minded to do.
I stress that I see no objection to implementing ICCPR in Scotland. In the longer term, it may prove to be a good thing. What I object to very strongly is the petition being sold as if it is a solution to the constitutional issue. It is not! I object because things like this serve only to distract and divert independence supporters and activists from initiatives which do serve Scotland's cause.
Sign the RSS petition, by all means. But if you are signing under the illusion that you are helping Scotland's cause, you are misguided.
Below is an extract from the RSS Constitution, which explains what RSS is trying to do. It's important to understand that restoring the People's direct political rights is a first step towards realising Popular Sovereignty in practice. Most Scots, if you asked them, are unaware that they are the Sovereign, so conditioned are they to parliamentary sovereignty, the model that has been imposed onto them both from Westminster and Holyrood. The petition is a way to not only get Holyrood to finally do something on behalf of the People but also to educate the People about their rights and then to demand them from elected representatives.
Here's the extract:
RSS is a bottom-up organisation, which distinguishes it from all other pro-independence organisations which are top-down. The advantage of such a federal structure is that the power and decision-making is retained locally, while allowing communications and ideas to flow freely between the local and national levels.
Each unit of RSS is independent and autonomous, retaining its own money and making its own decisions. It does not take orders or instructions from the national level. It is connected to other RSS units and to the national unit by a common objective and a common route to achieving that objective:
RSS’s common objective is Self-Determination and, if the People so wish, Independence.
The common route is implementation in Scottish law of two UN-recognised Human Rights: direct Political Rights and Self-Determination. Implementing ICCPR, the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the UK in 1976 but never enacted in domestic law, will achieve both.
Political Rights: On 6th January 2025 RSS launched a Petition which, once agreed to by a majority of MSPs, will finally give real meaning to the term Popular Sovereignty (commonly referred to as Direct Democracy (DD) & Decentralised Direct Democracy (DDD)):
Self-Determination: On 19thDecember 2024, RSS wrote to the First Minister demanding that MSPs comply with Schedule 5 of the Scotland Act 1998 and implement ICCPR, without reservation or reference to devolution, in Scottish legislation (ICCPR Art 1). In its 4th February report to the UN Human Rights Committee, the Scottish Human Rights Commission stated: The Scotland Act 1998 requires both the Scottish Parliament and Government to observe and implement all the UK’s international Human Rights obligations. If MSPs do not support the RSS campaign, soon to be posted on ScotlandDecides.org, they will not be re-elected in 2026.
To achieve the common objective, RSS has defined three strategic priorities:
Decentralisation
Direct Democracy
National Governance
These three priorities underly the actions of all RSS activists within Local Action Groups as they apply the RSS Campaign model to address local and regional issues. Should the elected representatives not respect the wishes of the electorate concerned, they will not be re-elected.
RSS’s common objective is Self-Determination and, if the People so wish, Independence.
Sign the Petition in favour of direct Political Rights.
Obviously, a long-term 'plan'. So, why the insistence that ICCPR be implemented before the 2026 election? And what arrangements has RSS agreed with the British state by which they halt their efforts to subsume Scotland into Greater England while RSS pursues its objectives?
The most important question, however, is this. Why is this being sold as a 'solution' to the constitutional predicament when it just isn't?
Doubtless some people will be impressed by being shown this "extract from the RSS Constitution". But I am not diverted from the fact that it answers none of these questions.
The focus must surely be on restoring Scotland's full self-government and the return of Scotland's independent statehood.
Or, more specifically, on the process by which that end (of the Union) will be achieved.
The detailed constitution of the country, and form of democracy, can and should be discussed and decided upon. But after the prime objective of Scotland's Cause has been realised.
There is some serious confusion here. Firstly, "Scotland’s stated constitutional goal" is independence - the dissolution of the Union. It makes no sense to say that the goal is "Popular Sovereignty" because we already have that. That the people of Scotland are sovereign is both a constitutional fact and an abiding principle underpinning Scotland's democracy.
The problem is not that we don't have popular sovereignty, but that the Union imposes 'artificial' constraints on our exercise of that sovereignty. Most notable - and most pertinently - the Union allows the coloniser to limit and/or obstruct the exercise of our right of self-determination. This despite the fact that self-determination is arguably the most fundamental human right.
Correctly stated, Scotland's constitutional goal is the restoration of independence. That is to say, the constitutional status which permits the full and proper exercise of all our rights as the sovereign people of Scotland. In short, liberation.
Stating that the constitutional goal is "Popular Sovereignty" would only make some kind of sense if the term 'popular sovereignty' were being used as a synonym for independence. Which it is not.
(Neither is the term 'self-determination' a synonym for independence, although it is depressingly frequently used as if it was. If independence is what is meant, say independence. Don't get me started on the non-word 'indy'! Reducing a major issue to baby-talk! Ugh!!!)
So, for the moment let us assume that what is being claimed is that incorporating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) into Scottish law would institute in Scotland the "Direct Democracy" which it is further claimed "provides the only tools by which to achieve Scotland’s stated constitutional goal of [independence]".
This is nonsense. For a start, incorporating ICCPR into Scots law might enable us to begin the process of instituting direct democracy. But there being no such thing as magic, this would necessarily be a protracted process. It would require a considerable amount of further legislation. More importantly, it would demand a huge amount of public education. The notion that a Swiss-style system of direct democracy can be introduced in Scotland 'overnight' is just plain ridiculous.
And it does precisely nothing for Scotland's cause. There may be many excellent arguments for incorporating ICCPR into Scottish law, but progressing the restoration of our independence definitely isn't one of them. Incorporating ICCPR into Scottish law leaves the constitutional issue precisely where it is now. Because it does nothing to address the matter of legislative competence.
The day before ICCPR is implemented, the Scottish Parliament has no legislative competence in the area of the constitution because this legislative competence is withheld by the British state using the power afforded it by the Union.
The day after ICCPR is implemented, the Scottish Parliament has no legislative competence in the area of the constitution because this legislative competence is withheld by the British state using the power afforded it by the Union.
NO CHANGE!
The petition also demands that the ICCPR be implemented "prior to the next Holyrood parliamentary election". It is not immediately obvious that this is even possible. What is clear is that it gives the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee a reason/excuse to knock back the petition if that is what they are minded to do.
I stress that I see no objection to implementing ICCPR in Scotland. In the longer term, it may prove to be a good thing. What I object to very strongly is the petition being sold as if it is a solution to the constitutional issue. It is not! I object because things like this serve only to distract and divert independence supporters and activists from initiatives which do serve Scotland's cause.
Sign the RSS petition, by all means. But if you are signing under the illusion that you are helping Scotland's cause, you are misguided.
Thanks, Peter, for your comments.
Below is an extract from the RSS Constitution, which explains what RSS is trying to do. It's important to understand that restoring the People's direct political rights is a first step towards realising Popular Sovereignty in practice. Most Scots, if you asked them, are unaware that they are the Sovereign, so conditioned are they to parliamentary sovereignty, the model that has been imposed onto them both from Westminster and Holyrood. The petition is a way to not only get Holyrood to finally do something on behalf of the People but also to educate the People about their rights and then to demand them from elected representatives.
Here's the extract:
RSS is a bottom-up organisation, which distinguishes it from all other pro-independence organisations which are top-down. The advantage of such a federal structure is that the power and decision-making is retained locally, while allowing communications and ideas to flow freely between the local and national levels.
Each unit of RSS is independent and autonomous, retaining its own money and making its own decisions. It does not take orders or instructions from the national level. It is connected to other RSS units and to the national unit by a common objective and a common route to achieving that objective:
RSS’s common objective is Self-Determination and, if the People so wish, Independence.
The common route is implementation in Scottish law of two UN-recognised Human Rights: direct Political Rights and Self-Determination. Implementing ICCPR, the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the UK in 1976 but never enacted in domestic law, will achieve both.
Political Rights: On 6th January 2025 RSS launched a Petition which, once agreed to by a majority of MSPs, will finally give real meaning to the term Popular Sovereignty (commonly referred to as Direct Democracy (DD) & Decentralised Direct Democracy (DDD)):
Introduction of the right to Popular Initiatives and Referendums (ICCPR Art. 25). You can sign the Petition here: https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE2135
Self-Determination: On 19thDecember 2024, RSS wrote to the First Minister demanding that MSPs comply with Schedule 5 of the Scotland Act 1998 and implement ICCPR, without reservation or reference to devolution, in Scottish legislation (ICCPR Art 1). In its 4th February report to the UN Human Rights Committee, the Scottish Human Rights Commission stated: The Scotland Act 1998 requires both the Scottish Parliament and Government to observe and implement all the UK’s international Human Rights obligations. If MSPs do not support the RSS campaign, soon to be posted on ScotlandDecides.org, they will not be re-elected in 2026.
To achieve the common objective, RSS has defined three strategic priorities:
Decentralisation
Direct Democracy
National Governance
These three priorities underly the actions of all RSS activists within Local Action Groups as they apply the RSS Campaign model to address local and regional issues. Should the elected representatives not respect the wishes of the electorate concerned, they will not be re-elected.
RSS’s common objective is Self-Determination and, if the People so wish, Independence.
Sign the Petition in favour of direct Political Rights.
https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE2135
Obviously, a long-term 'plan'. So, why the insistence that ICCPR be implemented before the 2026 election? And what arrangements has RSS agreed with the British state by which they halt their efforts to subsume Scotland into Greater England while RSS pursues its objectives?
The most important question, however, is this. Why is this being sold as a 'solution' to the constitutional predicament when it just isn't?
Doubtless some people will be impressed by being shown this "extract from the RSS Constitution". But I am not diverted from the fact that it answers none of these questions.
The focus must surely be on restoring Scotland's full self-government and the return of Scotland's independent statehood.
Or, more specifically, on the process by which that end (of the Union) will be achieved.
The detailed constitution of the country, and form of democracy, can and should be discussed and decided upon. But after the prime objective of Scotland's Cause has been realised.