I NOTE your excellent report on my trial (“Nuclear protest pensioner found not guilty”, The Herald, February 10). However, you write that I claimed international law was higher than Scots law. I made no such claim. Far from belittling Scots law, I on the contrary extolled it. My actual words were: “It is inconceivable that the Common Law of Scotland tolerate the threat of mass murder as a permissible tactic in war. Even if there were no Geneva and Hague Conventions, no Nuremberg Principles, or any other of the vast corpus of International humanitarian law, I am happy to base my case on the Common Law of Scotland.”
I quoted the precedent of the Jamaican slave Joseph Knight, who was liberated in 1778 by the sheriff of Perthshire, on the grounds that slavery was not recognised by the law of Scotland. This was before slavery was abolished by Parliament until 1833. The court upheld basic justice against the government of the day then, and can do so again today.
Which leads to the crux of the matter. While I am relieved to have been acquitted, it is deplorable that the courts have never yet confronted the blatant illegality of Trident. As a weapon of mass destruction, it undoubtedly belongs to a prohibited class of weaponry. Yet these are regularly trundled along our roads.
Scottish courts have not yet addressed this ongoing crime. Indeed, by their silence and passivity they are “art and part” of the criminal conspiracy.
The 1945 London Agreement on War Crimes, which led to the prosecution and conviction of the Nazis, enshrined the principle that no-one, of whatever office or rank, is above the jurisdiction of international law. All individuals are deemed to be personally responsible for their actions.
“Qui tacet vult consentire”. He who is silent, is giving consent. By their silence Scottish courts are complicit in this on-going criminal activity.
Brian M Quail,
2 Hyndland Avenue, Glasgow.
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