Constitution for Scotland Public Consultation Hub

Section 1.2. This Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of Scotland which holds that the founding principles of Scotland are based on Constitutional Democracy. The people are the supreme source of authority of the government which derives the right to govern from their consent.

Proposed Amendments to Section

Please scrutinise all the proposed amendments and replies before commenting or voting. Short comments are most often read and must not exceed 100 words.
You can propose an Amendment at the bottom of this page - please read the guidelines .
Note that the original wording appears again first below and sustains the same comment & voting regime as all other amendment proposals.

Original Version

  • Avatar admin
    Administrator #1  •  2020-08-20 16:53:03

    Section 1.2. Section 1.2. This Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of Scotland which holds that the founding principles of Scotland are based on Constitutional Democracy. The people are the supreme source of authority of the government which derives the right to govern from their consent.

      • Gee-jay

        Section 1.2. This is meaningless without a citizens’ body to oversee the constitution in practice and monitor the work of government to ensure it is compliant with the constitution. The USA is a “constitutional democracy” but ever since its inception, the government has actually denied certain groups their constitutional rights. The current Administration seems intent on further restricting rights of many citizens and with a compliant Supreme Court filled with political appointees there may be no way of legally curtailing the power of the executive.

        We need a representative citizens’ body, which cannot be annulled, to hold the executive to account.

          • BillC

            Section 1.2. One thought I have on this might be "who guards the guardians?" I forget the Latin phrase. I'm not against the idea of a citizens' assembly, which in fact might be a useful way of reviewing specific areas of interest or policy. Regular general elections would be the normal way of holding governments to account, as well as governments being legally obliged to follow the spirit and the letter of the constitution.

              • Arfem

                Section 1.2. Yes, we need something stronger here. Government by the people and for the people has become government by two corruptible Party Machines andfor Big
                Business and dodgy Financial Players. MPs need something constitutional to help them resist these folk.

                No responses
          • jeanepark

            Section 1.2. The State and the judiciary must be kept separate. Judges, members of the supreme court, etc. cannot be government/presidential appointees. This system seems to work well in the UK.

              • Arfem

                Section 1.2. This Section states the Principle OK but whether a Citizens’ Assembly or a Revising Second Chamber, the ultimate power is the ability of constituents to recall their MP. Making this a practical last resort rather than a theoretical sop is the subject of my proposed amendment to 12.18. If you agree please support it.

                No responses
      • Caledonialan

        Section 1.2. I would agree with other commentators that there has to be some final authority on the interpretation and application of the Constitution. Only in the last resort can it be the people (in the context of a revision of, or amendment to, the constitution). Prior to that, the obvious mechanism is a constitutional court or council, competent to rule on the compatibility with the constitution of legislative or executive measures, and on the proper interpretation and application of such measures in the light of the constitution. I think that such a body should probably be separate from the College of Justice, and that provision should be made for it in the constitution. I propose a rewording of this section accordingly.

          • Gee-jay

            Section 1.2. Once you hand it over to lawyers, supreme court, politicians etc you effectively hand it to elites, often the public school, oxbridge, big business, banker types. Just look at the Growth Commission, or Westminster. Doing so immediately disenfranchises the ordinary citizen. That's one of the problems with "representative democracy", a contradiction in terms. The people must have a say if we are to get a fairer society, hence my support for citizen assemblies, selected by sortition.

Proposed Amendment to Section 1.2.

  • Caledonialan

    Clarification and introduction of a constitutional authority

    Section 1.2. This Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of Scotland. Scotland is a democracy. The legislative, judicial and executive branches of government all derive their authority from the will of the people of Scotland as expressed in this Constitution. Any dispute or uncertainty as to the interpretation of this Constitution, the compatibility with this Constitution of any legislative or executive measure, or the application of any such measure in conformity with this Constitution, shall be determined, where necessary, by a Constitutional [Court / Council / etc].

      • Arfem

        Section 1.2. Yes to a Constitutional Court, but we need to know in principle who appoints it and is the final decision by an elite of lawyers and judges or a jury of the people – would there be an appeal process?

        No responses

You must sign in or sign up to leave a comment.