Workshop on Scottish Independence

By
We have witnessed the recent elections, and the troublesome consequences that a closely divided electorate can produce in a voting system. Fortunately the upcoming workshop on Scottish independence organized by PhD candidate Jernej Letnar Cernic and Professor Carty should shed some light on the debates on independence and devolution which are likely to ensue. Here is a summary of the workshop:

On 12 May 2007 the University of Aberdeen School of Law, Scotland will hold a workshop on the legal impact of a referendum on Scottish Independence.
The issues discussed will be both a matter of comparative constitutional law and international law. We want to keep the questions for debate as open as possible, but they should at least cover the following issues. Is it, as a matter of public law , enough to justify a regional Parliament negotiating with the National Government for independence, that there is a majority of pro-independence members in the regional Parliament, or does the regional Parliament still have to hold a referendum on the specific question of independence? The Liberals, rather unexpectedly, are now arguing the former. It has been more usual to require that the people be consulted directly on a matter of major constitutional importance. The conference will look at recent international practice in various countries and have specific, very high expertise from Spain (Catalunia, the Basque Country) and Canada ( An Anglo-Canadian and two differing Quebec opinions).

What if the Scottish people, through an advisory referendum, authorise negotiations for independence, or some such thing as a new relationship or partnership, and the Westminster Government refuses to negotiate? Does a regional or devolved Parliament have a right in international law simply to declare independence in a democratic society such as the UK , where there is full Scottish participation in the political process of the UK as whole and there are no significant human rights violations or discrimination against the Scots? The usual international law answer, following UN practice, is not clear. Some recent Eastern European practice would suggest the affirmative. The lessons from Spain are not so positive. However, the Quebec experience, particular a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada, would suggest that a failure of Westminster to negotiate in good faith would justify an independence declaration.

The workshop is intended to explore and debate these issues in an objective and dispassionate manner. It hopes to add a comparative perspective which liberates the Scottish debate from the rather authoritarian and negative discussion of the issue of a referendum for Scotland that has been conducted up till now within the confines of the UK , within Scotland and England .

Venue: Macrobert Building, room 613, 12 May 2007, 10am - 530pm.

You can a find programme for the workshop at http://www.abdn.ac.uk/law/research/referendum.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Constitutional Right to Female Sexual Pleasure?

By
Although a right to “sexual pleasure” usually does not fare among traditional rights enshrined in constitutions, such a right was nevertheless proposed by a female member of the Ecuadorian parliament when debating a forthcoming new constitution. Reuters report that the idea behind the proposal was to facilitate gender equality and to avoid sexual violence. Ultimately, however, and in spite of this noble cause, the proposal failed.
Read more

Should the Media Shoulder Legally Neutral Obligation?

By
Although many people are heatedly discussing Tibetan issue, Tibetan terrorists or criminals, who infringed on the fundamental human rights of many innocent victims, should be punished according to existing law and the rule-of-law principle. Currently, many websites and newspapers maintained by volunteers exposed some lies and distortions in some western media, which always reported how Tibetan protestors were‘protecting their human rights’, but neglected and scarcely reported expression from Chinese common people. Basically, there is expressive freedom in Western countries and some lies and fabricated stories, especially in some prestigious media are not charged with any legal consequence. From the other perspective, some distorted opinions do arise nationalism within most Chinese people, who reflect totally different from the opinions as to 1989 Tian-an-men Affair. If these reports are prejudicial to China and distorting some truths, should the media freely be forum of helping certain...
Read more

Supreme Court Ruling on Punitive Damages

By
Image
The Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions this Tuesday. They indicate that new Chief Justice John Roberts may not be as adept at compromise as many had thought. When Roberts was nominated for the court, many praised his diplomatic and well-reasoned answers at his Congressional confirmation hearing. The cigarette damages case is particularly interesting, and creates a difficult and contradictory due process analysis. The Ruling in Phillip Morris USA v. Williams will hardly be praised by subsequent scholars for its clarity. It sets up a confusing analysis for evaluating punitive damages. The original lawsuit was brought by a smoker's widow. Her husband, Jesse Williams smoked 2 packs a day for 45 years. He died of lung cancer 9 years ago. In Oregon State court, a jury awarded the widow a record $79.5 million in punitive damages. The Oregon State Supreme Court upheld the verdict. Williams argued the cigarette industry committed "massive market-directed fraud" which m...
Read more