LL-L: "Language politics" LOWLANDS-L, 19.JUL.2000 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 19.JUL.2000 (02) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
 =======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =======================================================================

From: Criostoir O Ciardha [paada_please at yahoo.co.uk]
Subject: LL-L: "Language politics" LOWLANDS-L, 18.JUL.2000 (04) [E]

Dear all,

The issue of law in the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland (to give its full title
if we are going to get legal) is a thorny one, but I
will try my best.

Whoever asserted that Scotland has a different legal
to England is correct; de jure it does, one based on
Roman Law as opposed to English Common Law. However,
as de facto the highest authority in the UK is the
House of Lords and the Privy Council which operate
under English law, Scottish law has no ability to make
law for the rest of the UK and until recently itself.
All final appeals are held under English law in the
House of Lords and the Privy Council. English laws can
be applied to Scotland if they are initiated as
UK-wide legislation, and there is little Scotland (or
Wales, northern Ireland or Cornwall for that matter)
can do about it. A pertinent example here would be the
extension of the notorious Poll Tax to Scotland in
1990, which provoked riots, trials and jailing, of
whom Tommy Sheridan (currently Scottisj Socialist
Party MP in the Scottish Parliament) was an outspoken
and brave opponent.

Legally, the United Kingdom is an English -
specifically the City of London and Westminster -
heegmony. It is entirely correct to assert that
Scotland is oppressed by England, particularly when
one considers that all throughout the reign of
Margaret Thatcher (1979-1990) not once did the
right-wing Conservative Party gain any more than 25%
of the national vote in Socialist Scotland (typically
Scotland always returns about 55% for Labour, 25% for
the Scottish National Party and about 10% each for the
Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives) - nonetheless
Scotland got a Conservative government and its
industry and Socialist character was made to pay for
it.

The establishment of the Scottish Parliament has been
a step in the right direction, but the London
Government has reserved the right to abolish the
Scottish Parliament there - yet another example of the
power of England to legislate on Scotland's behalf
without consulting the Scottish people first.

However, it should be pointed out that the Scottish
Parliament's powers are somewhat erratic, and there
are usually disapproving noises from Number 10 Downing
St. when it exercises its competence beyond water
drainage and road resurfacing. An example of this
would be the recent revocation of tuition fees, which
flew in the face of the London Government, who
attempted to sabotage the development every which way
they could. Similarly, the incorporation of Human
Rights legislation there came at a time when English
law was removing the right to trial by jury and
introducing other draconian measures such as
revocation of passports on suspicion of football
hooliganism (for 'hooliganism' read 'being working
class'), and so forth. An amusing addition to this
litany of oppression was the attempted introduction of
on the spot fines for swearing at the sky (now
binned).

English law 'works' for the whole of the United
Kingdom in theory but in practice it is an instrument
biased toward a London-based ruling class. It seems
that one is innocent until proven Scottish, Irish,
Welsh, African-Carribean, an asylum seeker or working
class.

Sandy's quote about English law being universal may
have been hyperbole, but it was a hyperbole born out
of frustration, colonisation and a relationship
enacted in 1707 against the wishes of the Scottish
nation. Therefore his assertion still stands, and I
add my support to his claim.

Until next time,

Criostoir.

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =======================================================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =======================================================================