Referendum for the isles

Stuart Hill, writes (Just ask why? SN, 4/02/14) of the DVLA’s reluctance to instigate proceedings over Forvik road licences and his anecdotes, if accurate, serve to reinforce his broader assertions about the illegality of Scottish/UK sovereignty over Orkney and Shetland.

While unqualified in law and history, I have looked at Hill’s research in some detail and have, so far, been unable to quarrel with his logic and while plenty have denied his claims, I’m unaware of them having been refuted by historical and/or legal logic.

Hill’s claims should not, therefore, be summarily dismissed, as they were by Lord Pentland in the RBS v Stuart Hill court case, without an open, unbiased inquiry, by historical/legal academics, Scandinavian as well as Scottish/British, to establish the true position.

Such an inquiry is unlikely to be held before the Scottish independence referendum and it follows that Shetlanders (and Orcadians) must be aware of the consequences of their voting.

In particular, should Scotland become independent, a Yes vote by Shetland for Scottish independence might be construed as Shetlanders exercising their ‘right to self-determination’ as enshrined in the United Nations Charter, thus ending 550 years of illegality.

As long as Shetlanders (all residents) are made aware of that, I have no problem with them deciding to vote that way, however, it is important to realise that by doing so, you may be giving away your and your descendants’ sovereignty over the isles for nothing in return.

Such dearly prized rights should only be surrendered by negotiation and a separate referendum in the isles.

It is essential, therefore, that the Scottish independence referendum be declared non-prejudicial to Shetlanders’ legal position over historical sovereignty issues.

The Scottish and Shetland authorities must clarify the position, I suggest, with some urgency.

John Tulloch
Lyndon
Arrochar