Connect with us

Published

on

The Scottish Parliament does not have the power to call a second independence referendum in the country, the Supreme Court has said.

The unanimous ruling from the UK’s top judges said, despite demands from the SNP for a fresh vote, the country’s government would need approval from the government in Westminster before going ahead.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had proposed a second referendum – dubbed Indyref2 – for 19 October 2023.

Politics live: ‘Disappointed’ Sturgeon responds to Supreme Court ruling

But she had also warned she would use the next general election as an informal referendum if the court ruled against her plan.

Tweeting after the ruling was made, the first minister said while she was “disappointed”, she respected the ruling, adding the Supreme Court “doesn’t make law, only interprets it”.

Ms Sturgeon added: “A law that doesn’t allow Scotland to choose our own future without Westminster consent exposes as myth any notion of the UK as a voluntary partnership and makes [the] case for independence.

More on Scotland

“Scottish democracy will not be denied. Today’s ruling blocks one route to Scotland’s voice being heard on independence – but in a democracy our voice cannot and will not be silenced.”

But Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said now the ruling is done, “we must focus on the problems facing our country, from rising bills to the crisis in our NHS”.

“There is not a majority in Scotland for a referendum or independence, neither is there a majority for the status quo.

“One thing is clear – there is a majority in Scotland and across the UK for change. A Labour government will deliver that change.”

And the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Douglas Ross, said: “The SNP must now get back to work, drop their referendum obsession and focus on what really matters to the people of Scotland.”

Scotland held an independence referendum in 2014 and just over 55% voted to remain part of the UK.

But the pro-independence SNP, which has led the country since 2007, believes it has a mandate to hold a fresh vote because of its continued success in elections – the majority of members in the Scottish Parliament back independence – and because of the change in circumstances since Brexit.

Ms Sturgeon began her attempts to get approval for a new referendum in 2017 by asking then-prime minister Theresa May for a Section 30 order, which is used to increase or restrict, permanently or temporarily, the Scottish Parliament’s legislative authority – and was used to temporarily legislate for the first referendum.

But she and subsequent UK PMs have refused, leading to today’s court case on whether the Scottish Parliament could pass a bill to hold a referendum without the nod from Westminster.

‘Political consequences’

Announcing the ruling, the court’s president, Lord Reed, said legislation for a second vote would relate to “reserved matters”, making it outside the powers of Holyrood.

“A lawfully-held referendum would have important political consequences in relation to the Union and the United Kingdom Parliament,” he said.

“It would either strengthen or weaken the democratic legitimacy of the Union and of the United Kingdom Parliament’s sovereignty over Scotland, depending on which view prevailed, and would either support or undermine the democratic credentials of the independence movement.

“It is therefore clear that the proposed bill has more than a loose or consequential connection with the reserved matters of the Union of Scotland and England, and the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament.”

This is a blow for Sturgeon – Analysis by Connor Gillies, Scotland correspondent

This is a major blow for Nicola Sturgeon’s ambition to hold a second independence vote next October. It almost certainly rules out that plan.

But it’s not entirely surprising as the First Minister’s own top law officer wasn’t fully convinced of the legal basis for Holyrood legislating for a referendum against Westminster’s approval. That is why the Supreme Court got involved.

Indy campaigners will not be deflated at this ruling.

They are likely to see this as a stumbling block as they now pivot to Plan B which is using the next General Election as a defacto independence vote.

This will mean more rough and tumble of political back and forward. Opposition politicians will boycott.

To read more, click here

Lord Reed also said the panel of judges did not accept the SNP’s argument about the “right to self-determination” in international law.

The party had cited rulings in the Canadian Supreme Court and the International Court of Justice – namely over Quebec’s own independence referendums in 1980 and 1995.

But the leading justice said such an international law only exists in situations “of former colonies, or where a people is oppressed… or where a definable group is denied meaningful access to government”.

“The court found that Quebec did not meet the threshold of a colonial people or an oppressed people, nor could it be suggested that Quebecers were denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, cultural and social development,” he said.

“The same is true of Scotland and the people of Scotland.”

‘Scotland will be independent’

SNP MPs took to social media to express the upset at the decision, with Dave Doogan tweeting: “In the eyes of the people of Scotland, there is NOTHING settled about the current constitutional arrangement.

“The people will decide, and Scotland will become independent.”

But former Scottish Tory leader Baroness Davidson welcomed the “unanimity and clarity” of the court.

“No doubt the SNP will try to leverage this ruling for further grievance,” she wrote. “If only the huge effort, capacity and resource spent bidding to rerun the original vote had been put into health, education and the economy.”

Continue Reading

UK

At least 200 arrests at protest in support of proscribed group Palestine Action

Published

on

By

At least 200 arrests at protest in support of proscribed group Palestine Action

Police have made 200 arrests in London after crowds turned out for a Palestine Action demonstration – despite the group being banned.

Organisers Defend Our Juries said up to 700 people were at the event in Parliament Square and claimed police were preparing for the “largest mass arrest in their history”.

The group said those arrested included former Guantanamo Bay detainee Moazzam Begg, NHS workers, quakers and a blind wheelchair user.

The Metropolitan Police said a “significant number of people” were seen “displaying placards expressing support for Palestine Action, which is a proscribed group”.

“We have now made 200 arrests in Parliament Square this afternoon,” the force wrote in a post on X.

In an earlier post, it wrote: “While many of those remaining in the square are media and onlookers, there are still people holding placards supporting Palestine Action. Officers are steadily working through the crowd making further arrests.”

An aerial view of Parliament Square
Image:
An aerial view of Parliament Square

Protesters write on placards for the Lift the Ban campaign rally on Saturday. Pic: PA
Image:
Protesters write on placards for the Lift the Ban campaign rally on Saturday. Pic: PA

Read more
What does proscribing a group mean?

Legislation to proscribe Palestine Action came into force on 5 July, making it a criminal offence to show support for the organisation, carrying a prison sentence of up to 14 years.

Defend Our Juries announced the protest would go ahead earlier this week despite the ban, following several other similar demonstrations since the proscription last month.

On Saturday, a spokesperson for the group said that “Palestine Action and people holding cardboard signs present no danger to the public at large”.

A woman is dragged away by police officers after attending the Palestine Action protest in Parliament Square. Pic: PA
Image:
A woman is dragged away by police officers after attending the Palestine Action protest in Parliament Square. Pic: PA

Three people have been charged as a result of illegal Palestine Action activity.

Jeremy Shippam, 71, of West Sussex, Judit Murray, also 71, of Surrey, and Fiona Maclean, 53, of Hackney in east London, will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 16 September.

Another march organised by the Palestine Coalition, which is a separate group, set off from Russell Square and assembled on Whitehall.

The Met Police said one person had been arrested there for showing a placard in support of the Palestine Action.

A man is detained by police officers in Parliament Square. Pic: PA
Image:
A man is detained by police officers in Parliament Square. Pic: PA

Crowds had assembled in Parliament Square by 1pm, with people seen writing “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action” on placards.

Many remained silent while others sang pro-Palestine chants.

A Home Office spokesperson said in a previous statement: “The Home Secretary has been clear that the proscription of Palestine Action is not about Palestine, nor does it affect the freedom to protest on Palestinian rights.

“It only applies to the specific and narrow organisation whose activities do not reflect or represent the thousands of people across the country who continue to exercise their fundamental rights to protest on different issues.”

The ban faces a legal challenge in November after the High Court granted a full judicial review to Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori.

Continue Reading

UK

Independent review to examine how govt department handled prosecutions of Post Office staff

Published

on

By

Independent review to examine how govt department handled prosecutions of Post Office staff

The Department for Work and Pensions will launch an independent review into its handling of prosecutions against Post Office staff, Sky News has learned.

About 100 prosecutions were carried out by the DWP between 2001 and 2006 during the Horizon IT scandal.

The “independent assurance review”, however, is yet to be commissioned and will not look at individual cases.

It comes more than a year after Sky News discovered joint investigations between the Post Office and the DWP during the scandal – leading to suggestions some may be “tainted”.

Hundreds of subpostmasters were wrongfully convicted of stealing by the Post Office between 1999 and 2015, due to the faulty Horizon IT system.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What did we learn from the Post Office inquiry?

The DWP told Sky News they have “committed” to commissioning the review into prosecutions led by the department, where Post Office staff were investigated for “welfare-related fraud”.

They described cases as “complex investigations” which they said were “backed by evidence including filmed surveillance, stolen benefit books and witness statements”.

More from UK

They also added that “to date no documentation has been identified showing that Horizon data was essential to these prosecutions”.

The review will look at a period of time spanning 20 years covered by the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act 2024, from September 1996 to December 2018.

The Horizon Act was effectively blanket exoneration legislation which automatically quashed Post Office convictions but did not include DWP or Capture-related prosecutions.

Roger Allen
Image:
Roger Allen

The family of Roger Allen, who was convicted in 2004 of stealing pension payments by the DWP and sentenced to six months in prison, are “frustrated” the review won’t look at his or other cases.

Mr Allen died in March last year, still trying to clear his name.

Keren Simpson, his daughter, describes the review as a “development” but a “fob off”.

“I think it’s just getting us off their backs,” she said, “I’ll believe it when I see it because they’re not taking any accountability.

“They’re not acknowledging anything. They’re denying everything.

“No one’s saying, look, we really need to dig in and have a look at all these cases to see if there’s the same pattern here.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Everyday life was a struggle’ – former sub-postmistress

Mr Allen pleaded guilty to spare his wife – after his lawyer told him in a letter that there had been “an indication from the Crown that they may discontinue the proceedings against Mrs Allen were you minded to plead guilty”.

Despite the Criminal Cases Review Commission deciding Mr Allen had grounds to appeal against his conviction, it was upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2021.

The independent review will look at the “methodology and processes” used by the DWP, and the “thoroughness and adequacy” of efforts to obtain case documents.

The DWP say that the review won’t be commenting on individual cases or those that have been dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Post Office: The lost ‘Capture’ files

Potential reviewers will also be approached with experience “outside of the civil service”.

They will be asked to produce a report with recommendations for any further actions within six months of starting their review.

Lawyer Neil Hudgell, instructed by some of those prosecuted, described the review as “wholly inadequate”, saying the DWP “should not be marking its own homework.”

“Any involvement in the process of appointing reviewers undermines all confidence in the independence of the process,” he added.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘All we want is her name cleared’

He also criticised the DWP’s statement as “strikingly defensive and closed minded”.

“It cannot be anything approaching rigorous or robust without a proper case by case review of all affected cases, including those dismissed by the Court of Appeal.”

He said that where hundreds of convictions were quashed “at the stroke of a pen” a proper and “targeted” review is “the least these poor victims are owed.”

“At the moment there is a widespread feeling among the group that they have been “left behind and that is both legally and morally wrong.”

A Freedom of Information request to the Department of Work and Pensions by Sky News has also found that most cases they prosecuted involved encashment of stolen benefit payment order books.

In response to questions over how many prosecutions involved guilty pleas with no trial, the DWP said the information had been destroyed “in accordance with departmental records management practices” and in line with data protection.

Continue Reading

UK

Teenager guilty of murder of schoolboy Harvey Willgoose during lunch break

Published

on

By

Teenager guilty of murder of schoolboy Harvey Willgoose during lunch break

A 15-year-old boy has been found guilty of the murder of Sheffield schoolboy Harvey Willgoose.

Harvey, also 15, was killed by a fellow student outside their school cafeteria in February this year.

His parents, Mark and Caroline Willgoose, have told Sky News that school knife crime is “a way of life for kids”.

The defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had brought a 13cm hunting knife with him into All Saints Catholic High School, Sheffield, stabbing Harvey twice in the chest just a few minutes into the lunch break.

The boy had previously admitted manslaughter but denied murder. He was found guilty by a jury on Friday.

Harvey and his father
Image:
Harvey and his father

His defence told the court the defendant had “lost control”, stabbing Harvey after years of bullying and “an intense period of fear at school”.

Moments after stabbing Harvey, he told teachers, “you know I can’t control it” and “I’m not right in the head”.

Giving evidence, the boy told the court he had no recollection of the moment he killed Harvey, something the prosecution said was “a lie”.

They told the jury the schoolboy “wanted to show he was hard” and had become “obsessed” with weapons in the lead up to Harvey’s death, with photographs of him posing with knives found on his phone.

Chris Hartley, of the Crown Prosecution Service, expressed the organisation’s “huge sympathies” for Harvey’s family and friends.

“The CPS and South Yorkshire Police were able to prove that the defendant did not lose self-control but intended to deliberately attack 15-year-old Harvey,” he said in a statement after the verdict.

“We remind teenagers that there can be horrendous and serious consequences of carrying knives. It has been proven that if you carry these weapons, you are more likely to use them or be a victim of knife crime. You are putting yourself, other people and your future at risk. Please stop carrying knives and stop putting lives in danger.”

Harvey Willgoose and his mother
Image:
Harvey Willgoose and his mother

Speaking to Sky News ahead of today’s verdict, Harvey’s mother, Caroline Willgoose, said she felt she had “led [her son] into the lion’s den”.

She said Harvey was a “school avoider” who had “anxiety” about going to school.

“We badgered Harvey into going to school but I don’t think people realise that there is a problem in all schools with knives,” says Mrs Willgoose.

“It’s a way of life now for kids, and it needs to stop.”

During the trial, it was revealed that the defendant had had previous violent outbursts at school, and, a few months before Harvey was stabbed, the school had called the police when the defendant’s mother contacted them to say she had found a weapon in her son’s bag at home.

Harvey’s parents told Sky News’ Katerina Vittozzi they feel that the school did not take previous knife-related incidents “seriously enough” and felt “100%” the outcome might have been different if they had.

The head of St Clare Catholic Multi Academy Trust – a group of schools including All Saints – also told Sky News Harvey’s death “was an unimaginable tragedy for all”.

Steve Davies said: “We think especially of Harvey’s family, loved ones and friends today. We cannot begin to imagine the immeasurable impact the loss of Harvey has had on them.

“Harvey was a much-loved, positive and outgoing pupil whose memory will be cherished by all who knew him. As a community, we have been devastated by his death, and we continue to think of him every day.”

He added: “Harvey’s death was an unimaginable tragedy for all, and one that understandably gives rise to a number of questions from his family and others.

“Now that the trial has finished, a number of investigations aimed at addressing and answering these questions will be able to proceed.

“We will engage fully and openly with them to help ensure every angle is considered and no key questions are left unresolved.”

Describing her son as “a character” who “never stopped smiling, never stopped singing”, Mrs Willgoose said she was now campaigning for “all schools and colleges” to use knife arches.

“I want people to go into schools and talk about the devastation of what knife crime does.”

In an emotional interview with Sky News’ Katerina Vittozzi, Mrs Willgoose said she felt her son was “put here for a reason” and “I can’t let go until I put things right for him”.

“There’s no winners when it comes to knife crime,” she said.

The defendant “has ruined his life, his parent have got an empty bed”, she added. “He’s got to live with this for the rest of his life.”

Harvey’s father, Mark Willgoose, said that his son had had “a short life, but a good life”.

“He crammed everything in, and you’ve just got to try and see the positives in that,” Mr Willgoose added.

“Whatever happens in court, it’ll never be justice. It’ll never be enough.

“I think we’ve just got to make sure Harvey’s death is not going to be in vain, and if whatever we do saves one life, then it’s been worth us doing it.”

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

Continue Reading

Trending