WHAT ABOUT THE REST?

A guest post from Dave Llewellyn.

Two years ago Mike Fenwick and I had a show on Independence live called TwaAuld Heids. One of our more memorable guests was a farmer from Perthshire called Jim Fairlie

. Jim, came out with the (left field at the time ) suggestion that the Scottish parliament, instead of fighting through the Westminster controlled morass of obfuscation and denial, should begin by taking back OUR constitution from Westminster.


Jim is now a Perthshire MSP for the SNP and the inspiration for this idea. SO WHAT IS OUR CONSTITUTION THAT WE NEED TO TAKE BACK ?


It is the foundation on which Scotland was built.
It begins with the institution of the crown in Scotland – not the monarchy, the crown. The Scottish crown has never joined with the English crown because it is so different that it never could be. Since, the time of Kenneth McAlpine, our crown has meant the whole community of the realm. It is the people of this nation who are its sovereign and our monarchs only represent this sovereignty. This is why our kings or queens were always and only the first among equals. This is where our popular sovereignty originates and still resides. This is why our land was held, not by a feudal monarch but by the whole nation. And because the Scottish crown remains intact – it is still held by us.

The Scottish crown did not belong to Queen Anne, nor the privileges of that crown to the Scottish parliament, and this is how we know that Scotland entered a political and economic union but not a territorial union. How much does it matter? Well, under this fundamental constitution Scotland remains, like the Faroe Isles, a sovereign territorial nation whose natural resources were never included in the Union deal and they remain in truth and in international law, the exclusive property of the nation of Scotland.


It continues in Scots law with the establishment of rights and provisions spanning five hundred years of our history, most now unknown to most Scots even those in the legal profession.


And it was protected in 1689, at the moment when we faced yet another invasion by an English backed ruler, by the one and only written constitution in the history of the UK, the Claim of Right Act. Forget the ugly sectarian effects of the ACT. Just like England’s sacred Bill of Rights, with its parliamentary sovereignty – now imposed on Scotland in violation of the conditions of Union, they were put there to keep William of Orange happy.

And they no longer apply. Look instead at the rights and liberties of the people, a list that is nearly identical to those that form the basis of modern human rights and possibly the first recorded version of these rights. Look to the sovereignty of the people over the monarch, government, parliament and, (when they violated these rights and the laws that protect them) the courts. Look to the kind Scotland we would have, and should have had under the Treaty agreement, had the standing condition of the Claim of Right been honoured by our English overlords as it should have been. And look to the kind of Scotland we can begin to create right now with the laws, liberties and provisions, especially the sovereignty of the people of Scotland over Westminster itself, if we restore the constitutional rights to which we are entitled, beginning with those protected, under pain of high treason in Scots law and under the terms of the Union, by the Claim of Right Act, 1689.


WHAT WOULD BE THE MECHANISM FOR DOING THIS?

For this I have pass credit to blogger Calton Jock who posted an article about the Royal Prerogative which in Scotland is NOT RESERVED TO WESTMINSTER which is important.
Any privy councillor can give advice to OR petition the King under the Royal prerogative.


Its English counterpart was most recently used to send Jacob Rees Mogg, in his position as a privy councillor, up to Balmoral , to ask the Queen to prorogue parliament in September 2019. (Unlawfully as it turns out because he was sidestepping Westminster which in the eyes of the Supreme Court was sovereign ). The Royal prerogative in Scotland is not reserved to Westminster so could not be adjudicated by the Supreme Court.


THE KING HAS EITHER MADE A MISTAKE, OR BEEN BADLY ADVISED THAT WHEN HE TOOK HIS OATH IN SCOTLAND TO UPHOLD THE RIGHTS OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION, THAT THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR HIM TO BECOME KING UNDER THE CLAIM OF RIGHT.
From William of Orange onwards that oath that was required by every monarch to uphold the Claim of Right in Scotland was an oath to uphold the Scottish constitution it set out until it was watered down, likely by advice from privy councillors in the attempt to undermine Scotlands Claim of Right.


It was used to restrain William’s ambitions in Scotland and it was protected by law from subversion, alteration or even criticism under pain of death.
Charles 111 is required to honour and uphold it as it protects the people of Scotland from the tyranny of an English constitution, or he cannot, legally, become king of Scots.


Scotlands independence movement has 4 privy councillors.
Nicola Sturgeon, Stewart Hosie , Ian Blackford and one more who has championed the Golden thread that runs through Scottish history. His name? Alex Salmond.
I PROPOSE THAT WE APPROACH ALEX SALMOND PRIVY COUNCILLOR AND ASK HIM IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE TO ADVISE KING CHARLES IIIrd THAT THE ‘ Scottish OATH’ HE MADE, the one that is supposed to satisfy the constitutional requirements of his Scottish kingship , PAID only LIP SERVICE TO THE CLAIM OF RIGHT, acknowledging it only as a religious obligation. It failed to ACKNOWLEDGE his real and still standing obligations to Scotland’s FULL constitutional rights.
And therefore, I suggest that our very own Privy Councillor PETITION King Charles to fulfil the requirements of his office and restore to Scotland the constitutional rights and liberties provided by the Claim of Right, 1689, agreed as a pre-condition of the Union and as his oath requires that he should do. Or be prepared, by his refusal to uphold the condition of accession to Scotland’s throne, to face a Scottish challenge to his legitimacy as king.

AND I WOULD HOPE THAT JIM FAIRLIE WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THAT.


Beat the Censors

Regretfully there are some among us who seek to censor what others read. Sadly within the YES movement there are sites which claim to be pro Indy but exist to only promote one Party and will not publish articles which come from bloggers who don’t slavishly support that Party to the exclusion of the rest of the YES movement. I ask readers who support free speech to share articles from Yours for Scotland as often as possible as this defeats the effectiveness of the censors.

Subscriptions

Free subscriptions are available on the Home and Blog pages of this site. This allows,for an email of each article to your Inbox and that is now how several thousands get my articles each day. This avoids problems that some have experienced gaining access from Twitter and Facebook. You will be very welcome to choose whatever route works best for you.

Salvo

The work and important development of Salvo has been a beacon of hope in 2022 and as it develops Salvo is creating campaigning hubs throughout Scotland. Salvo will join  with Liberation.Scot and as the campaigning arm of Liberation we are looking at very effective campaigns kicking off very early this year and introducing some new campaigning methods as well as those that have worked well in the past. This requires money so all donations to this site, once the running costs are covered, will go to support the work of Salvo/ Liberation. I think you will see it well used and effective.

Liberation.Scot

We are seeking to build Liberation.Scot to at least 100,000 signatures just as quickly as we can. This is part of our plan to win recognition as an official Liberation Movement via the United Nations. We intend to internationalise our battle to win Independence and through the setting up of our Scottish National Congress will prepare and develop our arguments to win progress in the International Courts. Please help by signing up at Liberation.Scot. It is from those who sign up to Liberation.Scot that the membership of the SNC will be created by ballot.

39 thoughts on “WHAT ABOUT THE REST?

  1. Aye to that from me.

    It sounds a bit pedantic maybe, but even if King Charles III commuted the essence of the Claim of Right, then first, I believe that constitutes an act of high treason.

    But even the reluctant, threadbare, and disingenuous oath of fealty to Claim of Right for religion alone, – it is still proof of the Monarchy of Scotland being conditional, and NOT sovereign.

    Sovereignty is a binary and absolute condition. By his own admission, even were it a duplicitous forked tongue admission, King Charles III is not sovereign.

    Now whether he’s guilty of high treason…

    Liked by 14 people

  2. History has many, many tales of an unjust regime being being unseated only to be replaced by another. Sadly it is often the case that an incoming “New Order” is positive and committed….until they taste power, or more accurately the leader tastes Power.
    When that leader believes they have a vision and a mission and in which the People are the obstacle to its delivery, then the descent into tyranny is only a short step away.
    In 2014 I never considered that risk fully but Sturgeon has brought that vivid nightmare into sharp reality. I watched rule changes and manipulation unfold with regular frequency within the SNP. A rigid fist came down on any opposition.
    Independence will not address the problem or remove that risk. The problem is a very, very old malady. The majority of any Nation just want to live and prosper. They put people into power and trust them to improve their lives. However the elected soon discover that they need only produce a soundbite every four or five years to harvest the votes for continued dominance.

    Sturgeon’s abuse of Power has made me hesitant to give her more….to give anyone more.

    If the People are Sovereign then we need a body who represent ALL the People of Scotland because Politicians do not and will not.

    I reject the mini UK model. The SG sell off of Wind-farms, their silence over land reform, the ignoring of Women’s concerns, and much, much more has been a wake up call for many that we need a safety switch to prevent another Sturgeon, Harvie, Slater clique shaping our Nation to THEIR vision and ignoring US.

    Regardless of your views on the Gender Act it proved that Politicians DO NOT represent US. They know better. They will make those decisions FOR US. 75% plus of the People opposed it but it was passed by our Betters.
    Holyrood could easily and legally have had a Referendum on that! Switzerland has Referendums every week.

    A great deal of work needs to be done to prevent the Political dream of some to shape Scotland to their vision. A mini UK without the “turns each” in Power…..just Sturgeon or her “selected” successor.

    I trust the People with Independence. I don’t trust Politicians with it.

    Liked by 20 people

    1. “I trust the People with Independence. I don’t trust Politicians with it.”

      THIS! And more so the politicians that are self identifying as independence supporters!

      Liked by 12 people

    2. Agree with every word. Just imagine how empowering a modern day equivalent of the Convention of Estates would be. A second house, if you will, keeping a close eye on legislation with the right to veto law which was against ‘the common weal.’ What a country we could be.

      Liked by 7 people

      1. It is exactly what we need. Selected from the people with a maximum of 2 years in post and no return. They would change out one third every year for continuity……ALL Scots would be represented not just the political cliques.

        Liked by 7 people

      1. If the opportunities for Independence by exploiting historical Crown incongruencies are successful, I’m not sure that the Scottish crown would be offered to Charles III upon Independence.
        If it were a condition of independence that the Crown had to be offered to someone then I’m sure somebody suitable could be found – like, for example, 2021 nobel laureate Sir David William Cross MacMillan

        Like

  3. Great piece Dave. I have long thought we should have the Claim of Right front and centre of the Independence cause; which means, we have to get the King of Scots onside. He loves Scotland, I see his work locally here in East Ayrshire, where I live. We have to strike while Charles III is on the throne, because, his eldest son is an Old Etonian – he will not be so sympathetic to Scotland.

    Also, I keep seeing calls for a Convention of the Estates. I may be wrong, but, I get the impression, calling such a convention is in the gift of the Monarch. Another reason for getting him on-board.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Well if he loves Scotland he will help set her free along with the people. He’s not blind and must know that this country is being destroyed by his UK government and some others.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. What else doesn’t make sense to me is his love for plants and alternative healing and to be then steered down a generically engineered path and unnatural solutions like fake Green.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. He must have some right shite advisors is all I will say. If you love somewhere you don’t allow it or the people to be destroyed because the people are the country. They are not separate.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I get the impression Charles III loves Balmoral, dressing up in a kilt, being Lord of all he surveys, doing “good” to polish his image.
        He doesn’t seem worried his Kingdom is being destroyed by his UK government .
        I don’t think he’d be an asset for an Independent Scotland – or even needed

        Liked by 5 people

      4. Well as I said if you really love somewhere you don’t allow or be part of it’s destruction or the harm of the people. There’s nae way you would. If you truly love then you will remove the things and people who are creating their suffering. Whatever it takes. This is how you would know a real leader from a self serving one.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Did you ever watch the video of Sara break into tears whilst explaining what has happened to our people and country? She went on to apologise because of her love was such that it was having an effect upon her? She made me greet just watching it because like many of us we can relate to how she feels because we love too.

        Liked by 3 people

  4. Very good piece Dave. I think we already have the right people in place to steer us out of this sick union. Salvo, they are doing some excellent ground work, and will soon have the finished article.

    Liked by 7 people

  5. “…the Claim of Right Act. Forget the ugly sectarian effects of the ACT.”
    ——————
    This stubbornly myopic and anachronistic meme has been addressed a number of times. It is itself a contemporary prejudice which fails/refuses to appreciate that back in the day there were only two choices – (totalitarian “divine-right”) Catholicism or (incipiently republican) Presbyterianism. Past catholic thinkers like John Duns Scotus and John Mair had indeed argued the case for limiting the despotic power of pope and king, and that very heritage was now in turn bearing fruit in presbyterian constitutional critiques.

    Cf the following by Aidan O’Neill QC –

    UK Supreme Court: Article 50 ‘Brexit’ Appeal -Written Intervention by Aidan O’Neill QC the INDEPENDENT WORKERS UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN (IWGB) [2016]

    Excerpts —

    3.6 This tradition of popular sovereignty within the Scottish constitution reached its apotheosis with the decision by the self-convened Scottish Parliament in 1689 to declare James VII to have forfeited the Crown on the basis of its claims that he had over-reached the lawful limits placed on his executive power. The use of the word ‘forfeited’ was of particular significance because it was consistent with the terms of the 1320 CE Declaration of Arbroath as well as with the constitutional writings of George Buchanan and Samuel Rutherford.

    3.8 In this early modern period, models of constitutional government are expressed in the terms of political theology. The religious is political precisely because in defining the terms of the Church settlement in a territory you define the source and extent of power of the State. So in Scotland at least, the term “Papist” translates into a believer in absolutist government; “Episcopalian” into a supporter of constitutionally limited Monarchy; while “Presbyterians” hold to a democratic model in which the Elect(ors) delegate defined and limited powers to those whom they appoint to hold office.

    3.10 What this means is that this distinctive Scottish constitutional tradition embodied in the Claim of Right – of the Crown holding power from and in trust for the people assembled “in a full and free representative of this Nation”, with the Crown bound by the constitution to honour the terms and limits of the sovereign people’s grant of that power, and with both the people and the Crown subject to a duty to respect fundamental rights and the rule of law – not only survived the 1707 Union, but was expressly preserved by it and is reaffirmed by the Crown in personam every year of her [Elizabeth’s] reign.

    https://gobha-uisge.blogspot.com/2017/01/uk-supreme-court-article-50-brexit.html

    Liked by 8 people

  6. Had our constitution been observed we would not be in any union today. The constitution still stands and cannot be ignored therefore those who have acted against the constitution can and should
    be prosecuted.
    Its very existence is there to stop power being abused by individuals groups, parties etc.
    The constitution belongs to the Scottish people not the people of Scotland you cannot come and park your arse here and suddenly become a sovereign Scot.
    Sadly Alex Salmond has clearly stated that he believes -and therefore ALBA Party official line is – that parliamentary sovereignty – the (illegal) English model foisted on us with the ‘union’ – would be retained after independence. This means that nothing much would change for the People with Independence – we would not have the Rights that are enshrined in our ancient constitution to protect us from poverty, high rent, lawlessness, greed – and political excess. We’ve all seen how quickly the SNP have got rotten to the core after a mere whiff of power. All independence parties want to retain Parliamentary sovereignty – illegal though they now know it is (and probably ayeways knew!) because they want to keep power over us. That is not how things are meant to be in Scotland and the sooner we Scots start thinking like we are Sovereign – standing up to politicians – and signing liberation.scot – the sooner we will be off to the UN and our legal sovereignty will be restored along with our Constitutional Rights to hold politicians and the rest to account – and with the People in charge of the land, sea and all of our natural resources….
    No way is Salmond inclined to act against parliamentary sovereignty – all of our politicians enjoy too much the perks of power. Naw – the only route forward is with Salvo – Salvo is of the People – we have to trust ourselves – nae a politician.
    Ive watched a few of the we Alba book meetings one in particular where Alex states catagoricaly with a very angry face that he will have none of this nativist stuff.
    So Alex would be a poor representative of our constitution he does not believe that power rests with the people
    So all you Scots out there can continue being second class, an after thought, something that might be considered later, you know the drill you’ve been living it for centuries.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. How I saw a couple of would be Alba politicians online act as if they were authority really turned me off. Absolute power or the thought of even getting it can bring out the worst in some folk and this is why I agree with you in regards to protection required so we never under any circumstances end up like we are today.

      Like

    1. Just asuggestion, but can we withold permission for the alleged ‘Stone of Destiny ‘to be sent to London for the coronation of Charles III as king of whatever (though not Scotland).
      i understand that the FM has accepted that this should happen but it would send a very public message of the people of Scotland were to refuse the loan! Can we blockade Edinburgh Castle to prevent this (it would surely get publicity or has anyone any other suggestions?
      unfortunately it is better guarded in the castle than it was in Westminster abbey when Iain Hamilton and frinds liberated it.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. Let us honour our dead. Tom Nairn, the very highly esteemed veteran left-wing pro-independence intellectual, has died. The following is a section of his bio from Wikipedia –

    “An anthology of NLR [New Left Review] articles, ‘The Break-Up of Britain’ (1977, revised 1982) is the best known of Nairn’s books on the nationalism theme. It is a Marxist critique of the emergence of worldwide nationalism. Essentially, Nairn contends that imperialism from the core countries (Western Europe) amongst the peripheral nations (Africa, Asia, Australia, etc.) motivated the peripheral elites to mobilise their exploited masses. As such, they created powerful myths and stories based on local artefacts and local happenings. The peripheral intelligentsia, as he denoted them, were inspired by both romanticism and populism. In a chapter devoted to him, Enoch Powell is placed in both traditions. Nairn’s ideas on nationalism were in the news during Britain’s protracted Brexit negotiations from 2016, and Scotland’s desire to remain in the European Union; his major works have been reprinted.[13] His republican inclinations meant that his ‘The Enchanted Glass’ (1988) was one of the earliest serious modern investigations into the British monarchy from an abolitionist perspective. It won the Saltire Society Scottish Book of the Year Award. Here and elsewhere Nairn used the term ‘Ukania’ to suggest the irrational and Ruritanian nature of the British constitutional monarchy. His original source for the term is the nickname “Kakania” that Robert Musil uses for the dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy in ‘The Man Without Qualities’. An updated edition of ‘The Enchanted Glass’ (published by Verso) appeared in 2011.”

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Like most intellectuals on the left in Britain, there remains some confusion and reticence about self-determination nationalism and therefore what nationalism actually means, or what drives an independence movement (i.e. national consciousness and the solidarity of the oppressed ethnic group). The left in Britain (still) do not view Scotland as a colonial possession and an oppressed people, seeing it rather as an aberration, and I suspect Tom Nairn remained in that camp, with an emphasis rather on political strategies, class structures etc.

      Postcolonial writers such as Fanon, Memmi, Cesaire and Edward Said found that in a colonial environment the left also tends to automatically consider national independence as being mainly about an opportunity to radically change a society from capitalism to socialism, from right to left, with an emphasis on eradicating the class divide in line with Marxist ideals. Yet what they often fail to undertake first is “a reasoned study of colonial society” and to better understand what independence really means.

      In the colonial environment, postcolonial theory argues that it is important to remember that an independence movement is primarily about dealing with what is an imposed ethnic and cultural divide, and a cultural division of labour, and therefore the removal of an institutionalised racist culture that is the root cause of inequality and the lack of opportunity of ‘a people’ who are ruled over by an alien culture.

      This implies that an oppressed people must first become liberated, for only then can they seek to change institutional structures and replace the dominant culture (and cultural hegemony) put in place during colonialism; only once they have reclaimed their sovereignty will they be able to choose a preferred political ideology that suits them.

      https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/07/18/determinants-of-independence-colonialism/

      Liked by 5 people

  8. “I PROPOSE THAT WE APPROACH ALEX SALMOND PRIVY COUNCILLOR AND ASK HIM IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE TO ADVISE KING CHARLES IIIrd THAT THE ‘ Scottish OATH’ HE MADE,”

    Great article thanks.

    As for the above who and when the sooner the better, and I’d expect no excuses from Mr Salmond on why he couldn’t do it.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Well off topic and for a bit of levity after careful consideration I have drawn up a shortlist of who I would like to have my children. Sara of Salvo was well in the lead but a late run by Eva Comrie has made it a contest and then the dark horse in these enlightened times Phil Boswell has entered the fray as blokes can have kids if they say they can. Right. Or perhaps I should just slink off and divide as biology no longer applies. The world has gone mad.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. Exactly. Well said. The sooner we have re-established a people’s convention with the power of the Thrie Estates the sooner the snouts will be out of the trough and we can all benefit in Scotland.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Stuart Campbell has a devastating article on wings over Scotland this morning. It shows how much the SNP and Greens have been captured by a tiny trans cult. This seems to me to be a clear attempt by Westminster, aided by Sturgeon, to destroy the independence movement.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. News that has just emerged from over in West Dunbartonshire Council is that SNP Councilor and sister of Martin Docherty MP has stood down to become an independent Councilor due to disagreement with the SNP’s legislative gender agenda.

    In standing down the Clydebank branch Organiser Ronald MacDonald paid tribute to Diane by issuing a statement saying –

    “Diane is a personal friend and will remain a good friend.

    “As the one who convinced Diane to stand for council I am pleased that she became an excellent councillor for the people of her ward, and I am sure she will continue to represent her constituents well.”

    Correspondingly her brother Martin Docherty MP stood down as the Westminster whip after just six weeks in the job.

    It more than certainly looks like change, or be changed is coming to the Sturgeon

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Having read the Wings over Scotland blog several times I am still having trouble getting my head round what the SNP has morphed into in such a short time. Sadly I think talk of reforming the party is well passed its sell bye date as I don’t see how it can be done. With the NEC controlled by the cult getting anyone good onto the list is a non starter and as they also control selection of seats for Westminster hanging onto the few good MPs remaining may be a struggle. I suspect it is time to do everything possible to do a Scottish Labour on the SNP and reduce it to a minor party nobody takes seriously. Whether Alba can gain enough traction to fill the void remains to be seen but they have a chance. Out here in the islands there is a good chance at the next election we will have nobody to vote for other than on the list for Holyrood as I think Alba will struggle to stand in every Westminster seat. So Salvo no pressure but we may be counting on you to help us out.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: