HOLYROOD'S indycampers will make their case against eviction on the day that Scotland would have broken away from the UK if there had been a Yes vote in the referendum.
At the Court of Session today, members of the camp were told by parliament lawyers that it is in the interests of all parties to have the case resolved as quickly as possible.
The next hearing will take place on March 24 - the date earmarked by Alex Salmond as Independence Day ahead of the 2014 referendum - and see legal arguments finally put forward by both sides.
The Parliament is attempting to remove the camp, claiming it calls into question the political impartiality of its estate and is preventing others from using the land. However, the campers have vowed to maintain their vigil until Scotland becomes independent.
Despite being allocated one of the largest courtrooms in Scotland's top civil court, there was not enough room for all of the campers and their supporters, with a police officer estimating that as many as 120 people had turned out and some being forced to wait outside as proceedings began.
It emerged that 238 individuals have put their names forward as being part of the 'sovereign and indigenous peoples of Scotland', the official name which the campers have used to respond to the parliament's petition, following an earlier hearing when they were told to provide the information.
However, the sides clashed after it emerged that they had all given their addresses as the Scottish Parliament campus, meaning it may be harder to trace them in the event that they are ordered to pay costs.
David Thomson, representing the Holyrood authorities, said providing the parliament's address would "not suffice". However, David Patterson, who spoke on behalf of the campers, said the parliament was able to hide behind a corporate body and that they should be able to do the same.
"Why should the people be put in a position that the other side isn't in?" he argued. "The people demand equality. If the other side are happy to give the names and addresses of everybody concerned we are happy to take that on board."
Mr Patterson, who described the campers as the "sons and daughters of Scotland" later claimed that the protestors were still unsure about the legal basis being used by the parliament in its effort to evict them.
He asked for a six week break before legal arguments are discussed, a plea that was rejected by Lord Malcolm, who appeared at times to be losing patience with the campers as his request that they stick to procedural issues was ignored. After the campers asked for a transcript from an earlier hearing on the basis that the Court of Session is a court of record, Lord Malcolm was forced to explain: "Court of record does not mean everything is recorded. Can you please keep your mind to responding to what Mr Thomson has said."
Mr Patterson said that the campers had attempted to gain legal aid and professional representation, but explained that "no lawyer would touch it".
The parliament, which has hired one of the country's leading legal firms to fight its corner, has signalled its intention to pursue the campers for costs which are likely to spiral to five figures if it wins the case.
Mr Thomson argued that the request for a hearing in six weeks was unreasonable, given the campers had been told to prepare to come up with arguments in January.
He said that from submissions so far, he believed the group had indicated they would cite the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples while also arguing that the 1707 Act of Union, which let to the creation of the United Kingdom, is incompatible with the parliament's petition.
Lord Malcolm said: "I am of the view this petition should be resolved one way or the other sooner rather than later." On the issue of campers' addresses, he added: "I will simply say the order continues to apply."
It is likely the judge will not make a decision at the March 24 hearing, but will instead take time to consider whether or not to uphold the parliament's case.
In an update to MSPs, issued this afternoon, Scottish Parliament chief executive Paul Grice said: "As we have said consistently throughout this process, the Corporate Body’s main aim is to protect and defend the rights of all those who wish to access and use Parliament land responsibly.
"We recognise the importance of peaceful protest in a democratic society. However the occupation of a public space on an exclusive basis and to the exclusion of others is not a precedent we wish to see established. Moreover the presence of a permanent camp advocating a particular position is at odds with our policy of maintaining a politically neutral position.
"The Corporate Body regrets that it has been forced to take this action but given the protesters refusal to vacate the land or consider alternative options such as on-going daily protests, we were left with no choice."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel