{"title":"用大锤敲开坚果:苏格兰宪法背景下第二次苏格兰独立公投的检察总长参考文献","authors":"Pravar Petkar","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v75iad1.1066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in the Reference by the Lord Advocate of Devolution Issues under Paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 [2022] UKSC 31 not only confirms that holding a second referendum on Scottish independence is outside the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence but raises a series of important constitutional issues. These include the constitutional status of referendums, the importance of sub-state democracy and the sovereignty of the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament. Whilst the Court gives referendums more significance than they were previously thought to have, its reasoning invoking democracy and on parliamentary sovereignty suggests it has adopted a vision of the UK constitution in which UK-level authority is privileged over sub-state authority, to the detriment of subsidiarity and devolved autonomy.","PeriodicalId":509896,"journal":{"name":"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly","volume":"216 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cracking a nut with a sledgehammer: the Lord Advocate’s Reference on a second Scottish independence referendum in constitutional context\",\"authors\":\"Pravar Petkar\",\"doi\":\"10.53386/nilq.v75iad1.1066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in the Reference by the Lord Advocate of Devolution Issues under Paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 [2022] UKSC 31 not only confirms that holding a second referendum on Scottish independence is outside the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence but raises a series of important constitutional issues. These include the constitutional status of referendums, the importance of sub-state democracy and the sovereignty of the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament. Whilst the Court gives referendums more significance than they were previously thought to have, its reasoning invoking democracy and on parliamentary sovereignty suggests it has adopted a vision of the UK constitution in which UK-level authority is privileged over sub-state authority, to the detriment of subsidiarity and devolved autonomy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"216 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v75iad1.1066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v75iad1.1066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
英国最高法院在 "根据《1998 年苏格兰法案》附表 6 第 34 段提出的权力下放问题"(Reference by the Lord Advocate of Devolution Issues under Paragraph 34 of the Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 [2022] UKSC 31)一案中的判决不仅确认就苏格兰独立问题举行第二次全民公决不属于苏格兰议会的立法权限,而且提出了一系列重要的宪法问题。这些问题包括全民公决的宪法地位、次国家民主的重要性以及英国议会的主权。虽然法院赋予全民公决比以往认为的更重要的意义,但其援引民主和议会主权的推理表明,法院采纳了英国宪法的愿景,即英国一级的权力优于次国家权力,从而损害了辅助性和下放的自治权。
Cracking a nut with a sledgehammer: the Lord Advocate’s Reference on a second Scottish independence referendum in constitutional context
The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in the Reference by the Lord Advocate of Devolution Issues under Paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 [2022] UKSC 31 not only confirms that holding a second referendum on Scottish independence is outside the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence but raises a series of important constitutional issues. These include the constitutional status of referendums, the importance of sub-state democracy and the sovereignty of the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament. Whilst the Court gives referendums more significance than they were previously thought to have, its reasoning invoking democracy and on parliamentary sovereignty suggests it has adopted a vision of the UK constitution in which UK-level authority is privileged over sub-state authority, to the detriment of subsidiarity and devolved autonomy.