The Right of Self-Determination - United Nations (UN)

1. In its resolutions 9 (XXIV) of 18 August 1971 and 9 (XXV) of 31 August 1972, the Sub-Commission recommended that the Commission on Human Rights should request the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities to place on its agenda the item " The historical and current development of the right of peoples to self-determination on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations and other instruments adopted by the United Nations organs".

2. In resolution 10 (XXIX) of 22 March 1973, the Commission requested the Sub-Commission to place on its agenda the item The historical and current development of the right to self-determination on the basis of the Charter i of the \ United Nations and other instruments adopted by United Nations organs, with particular reference to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Commission invited the Sub-Commission to give high priority to this item at its twenty-sixth session, to examine it with a view to establishing the guidelines for a study on this matter, including the possibility of appointing a special rapporteur for the purpose, and to report on the results of its consideration to the Commission at its thirtieth session.

Download Link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4shTEod1GsBYkQzZGlhbHhLUE0/view?usp=sharing

The Right to Self-Determination

Read More

Scotland may unilaterally declare independence in May 2015

I heard of a possible unilateral declaration of Scottish Independence from the late Robin Cook MP in 1983 at the Labour Party Conference in Perth City Hall. I asked Robin about Labour's prospects at the election. We will win Scotland, we agreed but it looked like another Thatcher victory due to English dominance of seat numbers. 

He then said 'How can we let the Scottish people suffer another Tory government hell-bent on union destruction and driving down living standards? I am seriously considering leading all Scottish Labour MP's over the burning bridge to join with the SNP and declare UDI'. 

Robin Cook contemplated UDI but clearly forces within the Scottish party stopped him. Labour has tended to make the mistake of equating their own jobs-worth interests in Scotland as the national interest of the Scottish people and by 1983 Gordon Brown had forgotten his statement of principle in the Red Book for Scotland that if the Union of 1707 stopped serving the interests of the working people of Scotland it should end. Labour do not serve the interests of the people of Scotland otherwise they would acknowledge that there has never been equality between England and Scotland since the Union of 1707. As the McCrone reports of 1974 and 1975 show all the cream of profit from North Sea Oil has been taken from Scotland and spent on England, with projects such as upgrading the north and south circular road in London, the M25 and the Channel Tunnel also paid for from the 'bonanza' of NSO. Economically, Scotland has been robbed and impoverished by subsequent Westminster governments. 

Better Together kid themselves by asserting that the referendum vote on 18th Sept expressed the settled will of the Scottish people. Nothing could be further from reality. Project Fear turned to Project Hysteria in the last two weeks and unleashed the most vicious forces of what was a Westminster-led ideological war upon the Scottish people to kill confidence, kill hope, and undermine the idea that Scots were even capable of running their own affairs. Economic collapse and calamity would ensue if we DARED to vote Yes, huge retail price hikes would be instantaneous, pensions would cease the day after the vote. Essentially we were told DO NOT DARE to VOTE YES - WE OWN YOU AND YOU WILL OBEY YOUR MASTERS! 

It went right off the Richter Scale of political discourse. The 3 riders of the Apocalypse rode among our cities like 'Murder' in Shelley's Mask of Anarchy. Those who think themselves the rulers of Scotland raged their venom via our tv screen and newspapers they own, telling us what they would do if we dared to think for ourselves. So, by any standards, the will of the Scottish people was among some groups, especially the elderly, that of fear, panic and some were petrified. Thugs who would deliberately do this to any community would be judged as criminals and brought to court and sentenced. 

The day of reckoning is coming for the Project Fear masters at the ballot box on 7th May 2015. 

Ruth Davidson MSP and her Labour cohorts are naive in the extreme to believe there was 'intimidation' on both sides of the Referendum debate given the state sponsored ideological war that raged upon the concerns of the people of Scotland in the last weeks of the Referendum. The egg thrown at Jim Murphy was idiotic. Some stupid unpleasant comments on the internet from either side pails to a drop in the ocean compared to the authoritarian anti-democratic abuse orchestrated from Downing Street, aided and abetted by the Scottish Labour crew. The will of the Scottish people could not have been more unsettled, muddied, insulted, scared and in some cases petrified. I saw the fear in pensioner's eyes while campaigning. In old Scots parlance, it was Keep yer fit on their neck. Endless intimidation was the essential buckshot in Project Fear's armoury. 

I, like others, have suggested, since the referendum result, that the Yes Campaign should be maintained and work together at the next election in tandem with the SNP where only one Pro-Independence campaign is fielded in each constituency. This would allow candidates to come from the wide spectrum of the Yes Campaign, if talents such as Iain McWhirter, Jeane Freeman, Lesley Riddoch, Blair Jenkins, David Hayman, Carol Fox, Cat Boyd, Colin Fox , Liam O'Hare, Jonathon Shafi and hopefully others if they are prepared to stand as pro-Independence candidates unopposed by SNP candidates. This makes sense on many levels. Yes literature, car stickers, badges, flags, T-shirts and so on are already made. No need for a new marketing brand for a new organisation. We all know what Yes Scotland stand for. This co-operation needs agreement at senior level but as an SNP councillor In would be more than happy for this community wide approach. Together we awoke a new civic voice in Scottish democracy and its structure is still extant and needs to continue. 

If there is a majority of Pro-Independence MP's elected on 7th May 2015 there are various scenarios that might play out. One is that the majority of SNP and Yes Scotland MP's will compel Westminster to deliver on Devo-max. But Devo-max will not provide the oil and gas revenues to Scotland needed to kick start Scotland out of austerity. England and rUK need that tax take to pay their stupendous debts. We will still have weapons of species obliteration in the Holy loch. £100 billion wasted on the Empire mindset phallic symbol of world status that gives the egos of Westminster 'global influence' to bomb kill and create more Terrorism in the name of peace and stability. We will not have enough funds to eradicate food banks and grotesque socially engineered austerity and poverty wages and socially engineered unemployment which is designed to keep wages as low as possible. Thatcherism started the process of social engineering and it has been continued by every government since, Blue or Red. Tories all. The Prime Minister and Gordon Brown differ on the Vow and are now promising different powers to our parliament. Brown is in a panic that Scotland might get control of raising and spending income tax because that might cause problems for British Labour in London - he is fixated on helping Labour, not the people of Scotland. The vow is in tatters already. Christine Graham MSP was right when she said the relationship between Scotland and London is now over, even if the vote was a majority for the No camp. If Westminster politicians cant even agree on what level of 'Devo-Max' they promised, what will they deliver? 

Labour has already lost Scotland. Whatever the result next May. They could not face the people of Scotland in public meetings. They hid from the people. They were scared to debate with Yes Scotland speakers. They were scared of the people of Scotland. One or two did on a small scale. They hunted in packs. They had meetings where people were invited via email. Selected members of the small crowds. Vetted. Secret venues. This was the behaviour of the people's representatives! What happened to the once proud, open and democratic voices in the Old Labour Labour party I once was a member of? They are dead. Labour have lived in a power 'bubble' of their own self-importance for so long now, they don't even know they are in a bubble. Bubbles burst. 

I believe the grass-roots Yes Scotland campaign should, if we (SNP and Yes Scotland candidates) win a majority of seats in May, make a unilateral declaration of Independence and demonstrate peacefully with unswervingly disciplined law-abiding behaviour, from the day after the election result, in every city of Scotland and demand action from our new MP's and the Scottish Government. Such a demonstration would not be to usurp the authority of our elected Members or Scottish government, but to show that Scotland is ready for major change, whether that be for full 'Devo-Max' or demands for another Referendum or negotiations for Independence should be left to the political leadership of Scotland. Nor would it be wise to call for an occupation of all cities to go on until demands are met, which would be a recipe for confrontation. It is the job of elected representatives and leaders to lead and to speak our collective voice: demonstrations are a way of making that voice heard loud and clear. 

A close examination of electoral statistics for Westminster governments from 1945 show that no government elected in that period had the authority of 50% or more of the total votes cast at any election. All took power with under 50% of votes cast. Two governments were elected with around 35% of votes cast. 

Indeed, when we consider the 40% rule imposed upon the vote at the 1979 Scottish referendum for a Scottish Assembly, and look at the governments elected to Westminster it will come as no surprise to readers that no government since 1945 obtained 40% of the total electorate in their favour. The iron cast stipulation of the 40% rule made for the vote in 1979 was therefore a deliberate stitch-up to postpone the creation of a Scottish Assembly. Labour are not to be trusted and neither are the Tories whatever Vow they make. 

So, if today's Yougov speculation comes true and there are 26 or more SNP/Pro-Independence candidates elected on 7th May, I would suggest that a unilateral declaration of Independence should be considered by grass-roots Yes Scotland campaigners as a means of keeping the feet to the fire of the Westminster elites, be they Blue or Red Tories. If we elect a majority of MP's for Pro-Independence candidates and have one or two more MP's that Labour, then a claim of right for UDI may be subject to question. However, if Yes Scotland/SNP win by 5 or 6 more MP's than Labour in Scotland then the case for UDI is clear because that would put Yes Scotland/SNP around 10% ahead in seats. First past the post governments in the UK have always taken power, even with around 35% of the vote, so Scottish UDI should be seriously considered if we win a large victory in May. 

I would attest that around 20% of the NO votes in the Referendum were cast due to fear and panic and therefore the vote may remain legal and binding, BUT it was a pyrrhic victory with intimidation at its core and does not represent the settled will of the Scots people. It may be far sooner rather than later that our new First Minster can echo the words of Nye Bevan and say 'We were the dreamers, we were the sufferers, now we are the builders'. Scotland must be Independent for the sake of all our people.

Source: http://www.sott.net/article/287750-Scotland-may-unilaterally-declare-independence-in-May-2015

Read More

Right to self-determination

What is the right to self-determination?

While there is no universally accepted agreement as to the content of the right to self-determination, it is agreed that at a minimum, it entails the entitlement of peoples to have control over their destiny and to be treated respectfully. This includes peoples being free to pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Where does the right to self-determination come from?

Australia is a party to seven core international human rights treaties. The right to self-determination is contained in article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

This right is also contained in Article 3 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples . The Declaration does not create legally binding obligations, but informs the way governments engage with and protect the rights of Indigenous people.

When do I need to consider the right to self-determination?

Self-determination is a right that pertains to groups of people, not individuals. In Australia, it is particularly relevant to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

You will need to consider the right whenever you are working on legislation, a policy or a program that will have a particular impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples or other peoples with a common racial, ethnic or cultural identity which has been built up over a long period of time. The people impacted should be closely involved in the development and implementation of policies and programs that impact on them and with consultation and engagement strategies that facilitate this. The establishment of the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples is a leading example of this.

What is the scope of the right to self-determination?

It is generally understood that the right to self-determination accrues to 'peoples'. The UN Human Rights Committee has declined to consider individual complaints about the right under the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has stated that the right to self-determination involves 'the rights of all peoples to pursue freely their economic, social and cultural development without outside interference' and that 'Governments are to represent the whole population without distinction as to race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin'.

The Australian Government believes that individuals and groups, particularly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, should be consulted about decisions likely to impact on them. This includes ensuring that they have the opportunity to participate in the making of such decisions through the processes of democratic government, and are able to exercise meaningful control over their affairs.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples also have the right to preserve their group identity and culture. The importance of consultation is manifested in the establishment of the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples.

Self-determination is widely understood to be exercised in a manner that preserves the territorial integrity, political unity and sovereignty of a country.

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The international community has recognised the significance of the right to self-determination to Indigenous peoples in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was supported by the Australian Government in April 2009. In Australia's response to the Universal Periodic Review recommendations in June 2011, the Australian Government stated that it supports promotion of and respect for the principles in the Declaration.

The Declaration is not binding in international law, in the way that a treaty binds countries that are party to it. However, the Declaration reflects how a number of existing human rights standards under international law apply to the particular situation of Indigenous peoples.

Can the right to self-determination be limited?

Derogation

Under article 4 of the ICCPR, countries may take measures derogating from certain of their obligations under the Covenant, 'in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed'. Such measures may only be taken 'to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.' While derogation to article 1 is not explicitly precluded, such derogation may be inconsistent with Australia's 'other obligations under international law', given that article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations refers to 'the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples' when enumerating the purposes of the UN.

Limitation

For the same reason, it would be difficult to justify any restriction on the right to self-determination in the ICESCR.

Which domestic laws relate to the right to self-determination?

Section 3 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005 states that the objects of the Act include to ensure the maximum participation of Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders in the formulation and implementation of government policies that affect them and to promote the development of self-management and self-sufficiency among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

What other rights and freedoms relate to the right to self-determination?

The right to self-determination may also be relevant to:

• right to take part in the conduct of public affairs in article 25 of the ICCPR
• rights of ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities to enjoy their own culture, religion and language in article 27 of the ICCPR
• right to be free from all forms of racial discrimination in articles 2 and 5 of CERD.

Articles from relevant Conventions

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 1

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Article 1

• All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
• All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
• The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

Where can I read more about the right to self-determination?

• United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human Rights Bodies (human rights treaty bodies that monitor implementation of the core international human rights treaties)
• UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (in particular articles 3, 4 and 46).
• UN General Assembly Resolution 2625 of 24.10.1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States In Accordance With the Charter of the United Nations)
• UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination General Recommendation No 21
• UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination General Recommendation No 23
• UN Human Rights Committee General Comment No 23 (on the rights of minorities under the ICCPR)
• UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Report to the UN Human Rights Council, A/HRC/15/37/Add.4, 1 June 2010
• Australian Human Rights Commission Community Guide to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Read More

See where MALAYSIA GOES WRONG in UN Congress ?

6 November 2012

GA/SHC/4051

Universal Recognition of Inalienable Right to Self-Determination Most Effective Way of Guaranteeing Fundamental Freedoms, Third Committee Told

General Assembly

Meetings Coverage

Sixty-seventh General Assembly

Third Committee

30th & 31st Meeting (AM & PM)

Hears from Some 35 Speakers in Day-Long Debate,

With Focus on Eliminating Racism, Self-Determination, Human Rights Protections Universal recognition of the inalienable right to self-determination was the most effective way the global community could guarantee protection of fundamental freedoms, the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) was told today, as it concluded discussion on several human rights issues.

“Whether this right is taken away by military intervention, aggression, occupation, or even exploitation, the world cannot condone its deprivation from any peoples in any region,” the Maldives representative said.

All States facing questions of self-determination must include broader ethnic and linguistic groups in decision-making processes, said delegates, as the Committee heard from some 35 speakers in a day-long debate that concluded its consideration of the elimination of racism, and the right of peoples to self-determination, then moved on to consideration of human rights protections.

The representative from the youngest Member State, South Sudan, said his people’s experiences were “an excellent lesson for the international community” on matters of racism and self-determination, since South Sudanese political parties and personalities had not been consulted in discussions on independence from colonial Britain, which led to distrust and decades of war.

The racial and religious discrimination faced by South Sudan for more than six decades should not have happened, with the Charter and the watchful eyes of the United Nations to guard against such indignities, he said. Nonetheless, despite all the hardship inflicted, South Sudan, which finally became a Republic in 2011, would like to put suffering behind, and seek a good relationship with Sudan.

During the discussion, a number of countries supported realization of self-determination for the Palestinian people, calling on the Security Council to recommend that the General Assembly accept the Palestinian application for United Nations membership and heavily criticizing Israel’s policies.

Malaysia’s representative said he had personally witnessed the suffering of Palestinians under Israel’s military occupation and blockade, which destroyed the economy and minimized employment opportunities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. “The sooner the solution is found, the sooner members of both sides can find themselves living in peace and security,” he said. “The only option is to make the two-State solution, based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as capital of Palestine, a reality,” he said.

The Palestinian observer said Israel had violently withheld the inherent right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, but those people remained committed to peace and had not forsaken their legitimate national aspirations. Israel should not be allowed to continue obstructing and dictating the terms of the Palestinian exercise of the right to self-determination, she said.

Speaking in right of reply, Israel’s representative said that it was committed to advancing the self-determination of Palestinians and to a two-State solution. The Palestinian delegate, among others, had neglected to mention that Israel’s Prime Minister had offered to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority President without preconditions but had been rebuffed “time and again”. If the Palestinian delegate cared about self-determination, she would stop berating his country and start working with it, he said.

In the afternoon, the Committee also resumed its discussion on the promotion and protection of human rights, in which most delegates vowed to continue engaging in the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review, a cornerstone of the international human rights architecture.

During the debate, the representative of Nigeria said the most severe human rights problems in the world today were caused by poverty, discrimination, conflicts and diseases. Political instability and conflicts, particularly in Africa, were intrinsically linked to economic development, he said, calling for an increase in development and financial assistance to realize the Millennium Development Goals.

The representative of Malaysia, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), said the work of the international community in promotion and protection of human rights should take into account principles of respect for national sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of States. “Freedom, progress and national stability are promoted by a balance between the rights of the individual and those of the community, through which many individual rights are realized, as provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” he said.

The European Union’s representative said 2012 had been a year in which the long path of transition in many countries continued worldwide. “There may be temptations, once power is gained, to refuse to grant to some the full enjoyment of all human rights. But, democracy can only flourish when it gives its entire people, whatever their gender, religion, disability, language or ethnic identity, an equal say and equal rights, guaranteed in law and practice,” he said.

Also speaking today in the debate on racism and self-determination were the representatives of Kyrgyzstan, Iran, Albania, Malaysia, Bolivia, Norway, Syria, India, Costa Rica, Armenia, Iceland, Egypt and Azerbaijan.

Also speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of Armenia, Pakistan, Syria, India and Azerbaijan, as well as a representative of the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine.

In the debate on the protection and promotion of human rights the Secretary-General of the Ministry for Human Rights of Burkina Faso spoke, as did the representatives of India, United Republic of Tanzania, Morocco, Viet Nam, Ukraine, Latvia, Barbados (on behalf of Caribbean Community (CARICOM)), Chile (on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), Brazil (on behalf of Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR)), Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Venezuela, United States, Australia, Japan and Lao People’s Democratic Republic.

Exercising the right of reply were the representatives of China, Russian Federation, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Cuba, Bahrain, Viet Nam and Japan.

The Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 7 November, to begin its consideration of refugees and hold a dialogue with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met today to continue its consideration of elimination of racism, racial discrimination and related intolerance as well as the right of peoples to self-determination, and to continue its discussion of promotion and protection of human rights.

Statements on Racism and Self-Determination

NURBEK KASYMOV ( Kyrgyzstan) rejected all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. He also rejected the recent film entitled “The Innocence of Muslims”, saying also it was unacceptable to direct violence against diplomatic staff. There were more than 100 nationalities in Kyrgyzstan, and one third of the population was comprised of ethnic minorities. In 1994, Kyrgyzstan had become party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, reaffirming its attachment to equality and non-discrimination. The constitution enshrined equal rights for all. It was pursuing a policy of multicultural education and transparent governance. A council on inter-ethnic development also had been established under the President’s auspices.

Noting that more than 10 years had passed since the adoption of the Durban Declaration, he said implementation of that instrument and its Programme of Action had been unsatisfactory, as racism persisted in all corners of the world. He shared the Secretary-General’s appeal for more political will and stronger measures to reverse the trend of racist and xenophobic violence. Intercultural dialogue and respect for diversity were extremely important in combating such behaviour. Political platforms based on such attitudes should be condemned as incompatible with democratic principles and he urged States to change legislation, guarantee the rule of law and carry out appropriate educational work.

Mr. RAHMAN ( Iran) said the right of Palestinians to self-determination was an inalienable right, yet Palestinians were being deprived the exercise of that right. Flagrant international human rights violations by the occupying Power continued unabated. The international community should not be indifferent to that travesty of justice and humanity. Palestinians deserved liberation and self-determination and international measures had been inadequate. As long as that question remained unresolved, peace could not prevail in the region. The question of Palestine was at the core of the Middle East conflict. The root cause of the problem should be addressed. The final outcome should be an independent, democratic Palestine with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital.

Turning to racism, Mr. ANSARI said racism, in different forms and manifestations, was among the root causes of internal and international conflicts, and threatened ethnic and religious minorities. Racial and xenophobic actions had increasingly targeted minorities, especially Muslim communities, indigenous peoples, immigrants, people with African or Asian origins, and Roma. The growing tendency of politicians to stigmatize people on the basis of religion, race, colour, descent and national or ethnic origin was also alarming. The world had seen a recent upsurge of “Islamophobia” in certain parts of the world, a trend manifested in attacks on Muslim places of worship, among other things. He was gravely concerned at the desecration of Muslim sanctuaries, saying such Islamophobic acts only cultivated animosity among different peoples and nations.

ERVIN NINA ( Albania) welcomed the contribution of the Special Rapporteur in his report on the increased use of the Internet to promote, fuel and disseminate racist ideas. Dialogue among different cultures and civilizations should be seen as an ongoing process that required dedication, goodwill and care. “We cannot permit that the reckless sporadic actions of disruptive groups through the Internet obstruct us from a genuine effort to reach a better understanding of each other in a world everyday more globalized,” he said.

Albania shared the view that the global fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance was an issue that concerned all and in which the international community must be united. But, it was also convinced that the fight against intolerance began at the community level, and no society could progress unless every aspect of discrimination was fought vigorously and continuously.

HUSSEIN HANIFF ( Malaysia) said the long struggle for self-determination still eluded Palestinians, and the expansion of Israeli settlements was tantamount to that country’s encouragement of settler violence against Palestinian people and property. Israeli policies and practices of displacement and dispossession only served to worsen the disempowering and vulnerable conditions endured by the Palestinian people. He urged the international community and the Middle East Quartet to take firmer action to stop the illegal Israeli settlements, confiscation of Palestinian land and resources and demolition of Palestinian homes, property and infrastructure. The practices of administrative detention and extrajudicial execution also required a stronger international response.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/freenorthborneo/posts/613722235394208

*********************************************************************************

malayan: Malaysia’s representative said he had personally witnessed the suffering of Palestinians under Israel’s military occupation and blockade, which destroyed the economy and minimized employment opportunities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. “The sooner the solution is found, the sooner members of both sides can find themselves living in peace and security,” he said. “The only option is to make the two-State solution, based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as capital of Palestine, a reality,” he said.

Bornean say: WE, personally witnessed the suffering of Sabahans under Malaysia Govenrment's occupation and blockade, which destroyed the economy and minimized employment opportunities in the Occupied North Boreno (SABAH) and Sarawak land. “The sooner the solution is found, the sooner members of both sides can find themselves living in peace and security,“The only option is to make the two-State solution, based on 20 Poinsts which had been agreed in 1963 Malaysia Agreement ! Full stop!

Read More

Sabah Secessionist to Confront Malaysian Government in Court?

Like Canada and  United Kingdom, Malaysia is a member of Commonwealth of nation. However, the system in Malaysia in a case of state demanding separation from federal government is unlike Quebec attempt to secede from Canadian Government and the intention of  Scotland to separate from United Kingdom. Both Canada and United Kingdom tackled the situation through negotiation and parliamentary contentious. In Malaysia unfortunately,  the issue of Sabah state in an attempt to separate from the federation is ending up in court. Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin earlier, warned against attempts to undermine the people’s cooperation, security and unity by calling for the secession. 

He stressed that police would not take the matter lightly as the statements were found to have been deliberately made to cause chaos in the country. In addition,  the  Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin said, Stern action will be taken against those  responsible for calling for the secession of Sabah from Malaysia. 

To make the news more interesting, a group called “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” (SSKM); aiming for the separation of Sabah and Sarawak from Malaysia has said that it would be happy to have its day in court to state its case even as the government claimed it had identified individuals driving secessionist talk and may try them for sedition. The group representative, Doris Jones a Sabahan lawyer based in the UK  said in a statement is ready to fight for its cause. She said the group has been in according to the law with historical facts and truths without any physical violence. 

The group released its statement after claims by the Home Ministry and police that individuals behind talk of Sabah seceding have been identified. “We believe that the threats in the media from the government is actually strengthening our resolve in Sabah and Sarawak to face them in court and argue our case according to valid facts, so that our voices may be heard officially, whether it is in Malaysia or in the international arena,” the group’s representative, Doris Jones said in the statement. 

The truth is, the world is watching the injustices committed by the Federal Government towards Sabah and Sarawak, she added. Jones, said that she received many threats because of the group’s aim but added that its arguments are based on facts and backed up by valid documents. SSKM has one public Facebook page with over 1,000 “Likes” and another “closed” group with a following of 16,000 people.The group also has a blog with over 93,000 page views and several videos of historical facts and local people voicing their issues, one which has over 108,000 views since it was posted two years ago. 

“They can shut it (the blog or Facebook page) if they wish, but I can create another or many more to serve the same purpose. We are ready to deal with them,” Doris Jones said adding that she has received many queries and interview requests from international media. 

Source: Agencies, BBC, Malaysia Today 

Read More

THERE ARE QUITE A FEW OUT THERE WHO BELIEVE SABAH & SARAWAK HAVE NO RIGHT TO GET OUT OF MALAYSIA.

THERE ARE QUITE A FEW OUT THERE WHO BELIEVE SABAH & SARAWAK HAVE NO RIGHT TO GET OUT OF MALAYSIA.

BUT IF THEY ARE PRESSED FOR A GOOD REASON THEY CAN NEVER GIVE ONE.

THE ANSWER IS IN THE UN DECLARATION on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1960. 

In its substantive law stipulations, the Declaration postulates what may be described as ordering principles, intended to guide the progressive development of international law in accordance with the General Assembly’s own explicit mandate under Article 13, paragraph 1 (a), of the Charter of the United Nations:

- that the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights (art. 1);

- that all peoples have the right to self-determination, but that this necessarily includes the right freely to determine their political status and freely to pursue their economic, social and cultural development (art. 2);

- that all armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease (art. 4);

- that immediate steps shall be taken, in United Nations Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories (art. 5).

All the above 4 declarations apply to Sabah and Sarawak

1. Both resource rich territories and peoples have been subject to 49 years of "alien subjugation, domination and exploitation"- reducing them to be be poorest "states of Malaysia.

2. Sabahans & Sarawakians should have the right to be free from Malayan colonial domination, to determine their political status and freely to pursue their economic, social and cultural development

3. UMNO BB has used both armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples over 49 years.

4. Decolonization of Sabah and Sarawak must begin immediately.

Read More

Anak Muda Berani Menuntut Hak dan Self-Determination

KOTA KINABALU: Anak muda (Gen-Y) kini berani dan lantang bersuara menuntut hak dan self-determination untuk Sabah dan Sarawak selepas mengetahui kebenaran sejarah kenegaraan Sabah dan Sarawak. Tiada yang dapat menghalang gerakan ini sekalipun rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak berdepan ancaman, ugutan, dan bermacam cabaran dan halangan daripada pihak kuasawan dalam memastikan perjuangan murni ini mencapai kejayaan. 

Bagi Sabah, perjuangan ini adalah untuk memulihkan status Sabah sebagai negara dalam Persekutuan Malaysia seperti mana persetujuan asal penubuhan Malaysia. Perjuangan ini bukan untuk memisahkan Sabah daripada Persekutuan Malaysia, tetapi sebaliknya berjuang supaya persetujuan asal penubuhan Malaysia dipatuhi. 

Tiada yang salah dalam perjuangan ini, malah jika perjuangan ini dipatuhi oleh regim Malaya yang selama ini tidak menghargai dan menghormati dan melaksanakan semangat, terma dan syarat perjanjian Malaysia, sudah pasti Persekutuan Malaysia akan bertambah maju dan makmur, dengan rakyatnya saling bersatu hati dengan aman dan damai, tanpa prejudis kaum, agama, dan wilayah.

Persetujuan asal penubuhan Persekutuan Malaysia ialah setiap negara anggota yang menandatangani perjanjian Malaysia (iaitu Malaya, Singapura (kemudian disingkirkan pada 9 Ogos 1965), Sarawak, dan Sabah merupakan:

Generasi Y

a. Rakan kongsi sama taraf dan sama rata dalam Persekutuan Malaysia;

b. Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak merupakan entiti yang berasingan dan berkerajaan sendiri 

c. Malaya, Sabah, dan Sarawak mempunyai individualiti dalam pelaksanaan pemerintahan dan pentadbiran masing-masing

d. Negara-negara anggota bekerjasama dari segi politik, ekonomi, dan sosial.

Tiada sebab mengapa perjuangan murni ini tidak berjaya dicapai untuk membentuk Malaysia yang sebenar. Walaupun sudah 51 tahun wujudnya Malaysia yang songsang, iaitu persetujuan asal perjanjian Malaysia tidak dihormati dan dipatuhi, namun Malaysia yang sebenar boleh dipulihkan.  Memandangkan regim Malaya sehingga kini tidak mendengar dan melaksanakan semangat, terma dan syarat perjanjian Malaysia, maka rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak tidak dapat berdiam diri lagi. Bagi Gen-Y yang sudah berumur 16 tahun ke atas, mereka boleh menandatangani kedua-dua petition, iaitu:

a. Call for Sabah Sarawak Rights

b. People's Petition to United Nations to Seek for Self-Determination for Sabah and Sarawak

Petition ini amat penting untuk membolehkan tuntutan hak dan hasrat menentukan nasib sendiri oleh Sabahan dan Sarawakian didengar di PBB. Sehubungan itu, marilah kita semua yang bersetuju dengan petition ini menandatanganinya.

Jebon Janaun 

Presiden Momogun Movement for Self-Determination (MOSIK)

Kota Marudu

23 Oktober 2014

Source: http://mosiktimes.blogspot.com/2014/10/anak-muda-berani-menuntut-hak-dan-self.html

Read More

Putrajaya crackdown fuelling Borneo’s secession drive, Sabah lawmaker claims

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 30 ― Any punitive action on Sabahans and Sarawakians asking for a vote on staying or leaving Malaysia will backfire on the federal government, state opposition lawmaker Datuk Jeffrey Kitingan said last night amid a growing rumble of discontent in Borneo.

Kitingan, who heads the Sabah chapter of the State Reform Party (Star), urged the Barisan Nasional (BN) government to adopt a softer stance in dealing with proponents of a Borneo referendum instead of threatening unhappy citizens with criminal defamation and sedition charges.

“It certainly won't dampen the spirit of the people, because the situation today is not the same as 10 years ago. In fact, it will create the opposite reaction,” he told reporters after a late-night forum here on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 organised by civil society group, Negara-Ku.

“You can see it on the internet. Young people today are not afraid of being arrested because of their beliefs and convictions,” he said, adding that their fervour was fuelled by an idealism to address the inequalities they saw between in a country separated into east and west by the South China Sea.

Kitingan said there were two parallel movements pushing a signature drive in support of a petition seeking a United Nations hearing for Sabah and Sarawak to be allowed a referendum on whether or not they should remain in Malaysia.

He said the localised movement, jointly run by NGOs Borneo Heritage Foundation (BHF) and the Sarawak Association for Peoples' Aspiration (Sapa), has so far collected 20,000 signatures.

The other signature drive is being handled online by a group calling itself Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM), mooted by a Sabah-born political activist and lawyer based in the UK, Doris Jones. Kitingan said he had little knowledge of SSKM's operations.

The Bingkor assemblyman said the BHF-Sapa signature campaign is still a long ways off its target of 300,000 signatures, but claimed that the government crackdown has helped their cause.

“In fact, it has accelerated,” he said of the signature campaign.

“Arresting people is not the way to handle the problem. Instead, the government should listen to them, and understand why they are unhappy,” he added.

He urged the federal government to review the Malaysia Agreement that had led to the country's founding with Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with the Malay peninsula and to consider drawing up a new Malaysian Constitution “because the old one is more or less invalid”.

Kitingan has long been a proponent of self-determination for Sabah, a position that lead to his detention under the now-defunct Internal Security Act in the early 1990s.

Supporters of self-determination argue that the allegedly Malaya-centric federal government has largely disregarded the 1963 Malaysia Agreement and the 20- and 18-point agreements pertaining to the special rights of Sabah and Sarawak, respectively, when Malaysia was formed.

Putrajaya recently pinpointed several people they believe to be involved in a movement to have Sabah and Sarawak secede from the federation, with Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar both issuing stern warnings against those behind the movement.

Earlier this month, police announced that they have identified three Malaysians involved in the secession movement, adding that they will be investigated under the Sedition Act 1948 and for criminal defamation.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/putrajaya-crackdown-fuelling-borneos-secession-drive-sabah-lawmaker-claims#sthash.JVLzFy9n.dpuf

Read More

Falkland Islands to hold referendum on sovereignty

The Falkland Islands will hold a referendum on its "political status" in a bid to end the dispute with Argentina over the archipelago's sovereignty.

The islands' government made the announcement ahead of the anniversary marking 30 years since the end of Argentina's 74-day occupation in 1982.

It said it wanted to send a firm message to Argentina that islanders want to remain British.

The UK prime minister said Britain would support the result of the vote.

The referendum will be organised by the Falkland Islands government and will take place in the first half of next year.

'Economic blockade'

The announcement comes amid growing tensions between the UK and Argentina surrounding the anniversary commemorations marking the islands' liberation by British forces on 14 June, 1982.

Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne is currently there on an official trip.

Argentina claims sovereignty over the islands it calls the Malvinas, and wants the UK to negotiate over their rule.

Recently, UK ministers have accused Argentina of trying to impose an "economic blockade" on the islands.

The South American country has been turning away cruise ships carrying the British flag and is taking legal action against five British oil firms exploring the coast of the islands.

Gavin Short, chairman of the islands' legislative assembly, said they were holding the referendum "to show the world just how certain we are about it [our future]".

"I have no doubt that the people of the Falklands wish for the islands to remain a self-governing overseas territory of the United Kingdom.

"We certainly have no desire to be ruled by the government in Buenos Aires, a fact that is immediately obvious to anyone who has visited the islands and heard our views.

"But we are aware that not everybody is able to come to these beautiful islands and to see this reality for themselves.

"And the Argentine government deploys misleading rhetoric that wrongly implies that we have no strong views or even that we are being held hostage by the UK military. This is simply absurd."

'Resolute support'

Prime Minister David Cameron said it was "absolutely right" that the islanders set out how they intended to "make their voices heard once more".

"And Britain will be resolute in supporting their choice," he said.

"Next year's referendum will determine beyond doubt the views of the people of the Falklands. Britain will respect and defend their choice.

"We look to all UN members to live up to their responsibilities under the UN charter and accept the islanders' decision about how they want to live."

Foreign Secretary William Hague said: "I hope very much that Argentina, and indeed the whole of the international community, joins the UK in listening carefully to what they have to say."

The prime minister's official spokesman later confirmed the UK government had been aware of the plans and had been in discussions with the Falklands government before the announcement, but said "it was their decision and we fully support it".

Argentinian president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, is due to attend a meeting of the UN's decolonisation committee on Thursday.

The Falkland Islands, a rocky archipelago in the South Atlantic, are 7,780 miles from the UK and 1,140 miles from Buenos Aires.

With the exception of the 1982 occupation by Argentina - which sparked the Falklands War - they have been under British control since 1833.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18412195

Read More

Nicola Sturgeon predicts independence 'one day' as she launches bid to replace Alex Salmond

Nicola Sturgeon has said she is “more convinced than ever” that Scotland will one day be independent, but made it clear it would only happen when Scots “choose that course in the polling booth”.

Launching her bid to replace Alex Salmond as First Minister, she distanced her from his suggestion at the weekend that there could be short-cuts to separation, and that Scotland could “declare” independence once the Scottish Parliament had sufficient powers.

Ms Sturgeon, who has been Deputy First Minister since the nationalists came to power at Holyrood seven years ago, is the clear favourite to take over from Mr Salmond, who announced he was stepping down after Scotland rejected independence.

She said she was not preparing for another referendum and the timing would be dictated by circumstances, including the outcome of any in/out referendum on the EU.

But she also refused to rule out the possibility of a commitment to a referendum being part of the SNP’s manifesto as early as the 2016 Holyrood election, saying: “If there is a commitment to a referendum in a manifesto of the SNP at an election and we win that election then that is a mandate for a referendum."

Ms Sturgeon, 44, who has already been endorsed by most of the Cabinet and may not face a leadership contest, also said she would be a “willing partner for progress" in talks about transferring responsibility for more areas to the Scottish Parliament.

She added: "I believe as strongly today as I did last week that independence is the best future for Scotland. And I am more convinced than ever that we will become an independent country. But that will happen only when the people of Scotland choose that course in the polling booth.

“I accept that last week the majority did not choose that future at this time. 1.6 million people is a remarkable number, but it wasn't enough.

“So my task will be to lead Scotland into an exciting new chapter in our national story. To unite our nation around a common purpose so that we can write that story together, and do so in a way that lives up to the hopes, aspirations and expectations of a country that is, on both sides, engaged, inspired and empowered by the referendum experience."

Ms Sturgeon said it would be the “greatest honour” and an “immense responsibility” to become First Minister of Scotland at such an “exciting and optimistic time”.

"I am putting myself forward for two simple reasons: I want to serve my party and my country,” she said. “And I believe I am the best person for the job.

"I also hope that my candidacy, should it succeed, will send a strong message to every girl and young woman in Scotland - no matter your background or what you want to achieve in life, in Scotland in 2014 there is no glass ceiling on ambition."

Her candidacy will also trigger an election for the post of Deputy First Minister. The winners of both will be chosen in a postal ballot of all 52,000 party members, with the results to be announced at the SNP conference in Perth on November 13.

The 26,000 new members the SNP has recruited since the independence referendum will be entitled to vote, as long as they signed up before Wednesday.

Paying tribute to Mr Salmond, she said he had transformed the SNP and made Scotland a better place, adding: “He also helped to make me the person and politician I am today."

Adding that she planned a “different approach” after the referendum, she said: “His are big boots to fill, but if given the opportunity to lead, I will wear my own shoes, and they will certainly have higher heels. I will be my own person and set my own course.

"We would not have come so far as a nation without Alex's vision, tenacity and statesmanship.

"But the challenges and opportunities of tomorrow require a different approach. They will demand the ability, not just to argue a case with determination and conviction, but also to reach out, to work with others and seek common cause on the issues that unite us."

She pledged to hold the UK parties to account on their "vow" of delivering more powers to Scotland's devolved parliament.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11117913/Nicola-Sturgeon-predicts-independence-one-day-as-she-launches-bid-to-replace-Alex-Salmond.html

Read More

TUNTUT HAK MUTLAK BANGSA NEGARA SABAH DAN BANGSA NEGARA SARAWAK!

Info yang perlu anda tahu... Pada peringkat permulaan pergerakan SSKM, ia adalah dalam bentuk tertutup. Selepas itu bergerak kepada perjumpaan kecil-kecilan di semua tempat Negara Sabah, Negara Sarawak termasuklah di malaya.

Perjumpaan kecil-kecilan SSKM dikenali sebagai "Lepak-lepak SSKM" dan berkembang menjadi besar. Pernah dicadangkan untuk ditukar nama daripada "Lepak-lepak SSKM" kepada "Bornean Gathering (BorGa)". 

Namun, apa jua nama panggilannya, perjumpaan dengan rakyat Negara Sabah dan rakyat Negara Sarawak tetap diteruskan malah semakin hari semakin rancak sehinggalah sentimen "Sabah For Sabahan" dan "Sarawak For Sarawakian" muncul semula dan menjadi hangat dan tersangat hangat sekali. 

Pemimpin Malaya termasuk barua malaya di Negara Sabah telah menghentam Pejuang Nasionalis Sabahan yang melaungkan slogan "Sabah For Sabahan" tetapi telah dihentam balik dan dipatahkan oleh Pejuang Nasionalis Bangsa Negara Sarawak dengan kenyataan "Kalau bukan Sabah For Sabahan, takkan Sabah For malaya atau PTI?". 

Semangat Sarawak For Sarawakian semakin hangat dan kuat kerana kesedaran sejarah dikalangan Generasi Muda Negara Sarawak. Buktinya, penyertaan mereka dapat dilihat melalui penganjuran Hari Kemerdekaan Negara Sarawak pada 22 Julai 2014 telah mendapat sambutan yang sangat HANGAT dan telah menggerunkan malaya untuk terpaksa tunduk kepada Kebangkitan Generasi Muda Negara Sarawak yang mana dikuatkan lagi oleh sokongan pemimpin-pemimpin Nasionalis Negara Sarawak yang berada di barisan Kerajaan mahupun di barisan pembangkang yang menyokong atas kapasiti individu dan tidak mewakili parti politik mereka.

Demikian juga perkara yang sama berlaku di Negara Sabah. Aktiviti Kemerdekaan Negara Sabah telah disambut dengan cara yang sangat unik dan berjaya melakar sejarah baru untuk rujukan dan tatapan generasi masa depan. Ini kerana aktiviti Kemerdekaan dilakukan melalui satu aktiviti yang dipanggil "Ekspedisi Sabah Merdeka Day". Ia disambut oleh semua rakyat Negara Sabah yang berada di tanah air mahupun di luar negara (Negara Sarawak, Negara malaya, Negara Singapura, Negara Taiwan, Eropah-UK). Pada masa yang sama juga, Forum Awam yang memberikan kesedaran telah dianjurkan di kedua-dua negara, Sabah dan Sarawak. Dan yang lebih mengkagumkan, Forum Kesedaran juga telah diadakan di malaya. Ini telah memberi impak kesedaran yang sangat besar sekali.

Dan sebaik sahaja semua aktiviti ini selesai, kerajaan telah dengan rasminya memperkenalkan SSKM kepada satu Dunia melalui media rasminya. Ia sebenarnya merupakan satu Penghormatan kepada pihak SSKM untuk berada di kaca TV dan juga disemua surat khabar pada halaman utama muka surat.

Adakah ia menakutkan SSKM?

Ia sebenarnya membuatkan pihak SSKM berasa sangat teruja dan gembira kerana perjuangan SSKM telah mendapat pengiktirafan daripada semua pihak dengan pelbagai gelaran dan tuduhan.

Dan yang lebih membanggakan lagi apabila perdana menteri malaya, ketua polis negara serta kumpulan barisan bn-umno termasuk barisan pr turut serta memberi pengiktirafan melalui media sosial mereka masing-masing.

Siapakah Pencabar/Pihak Lawan Utama SSKM?

Sudah tentu Pencabar/Pihak Lawan SSKM adalah Kerajaan persekutuan tanah melayu (malaya) yang telah menyamar menjadi kerajaan persekutuan malaysia. Maka, orang perseorangan, ngo-ngo yang kecil-kecil yang menjadi suruhan bn-umno-pr sebenarnya bukan lawan sebenar SSKM. Dalam erti kata lain, mereka tidak layak dan tidak setaraf dengan level SSKM.

Cakap besar?

Itu Hak anda untuk sendiri menilai.

Maka dengan itu, pihak SSKM akan menyebarkan secara langsung kepada semua rakyat Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak melalui media sosial SSKM tanpa perlu berselindung lagi. Justeru, pihak SSKM menjemput anda semua untuk menyertai perjuangan ini dengan menyebarkan kesedaran Sejarah berfakta serta Hak-hak yang MESTI DITUNTUT dengan bijaksana melalui saluran Demokrasi dan Bertemadun.

Bukan melalui keganasan, rusuhan, demonstrasi atau apa-apa perbuatan yang mengancam nyawa mahupun keamanan yang bersifat fizikal tetapi perjuangan ini melalui hanya dengan sebatang Pen.

Pen lebih berkesan daripada Peluru.

Petisyen, memorendum dan Referendum merupakan saluran Demokrasi yang diiktiraf oleh Dunia dan ia merupakan pilihan tepat dalam Perjuangan SSKM.

Oleh itu, kenyataan seperti berlaku perang, pertumpahan darah, rusuhan dan sebagainya itu tidak akan berlaku. Walau bagaimanapun, jikalau ia berlaku, ia semestinya didalangi oleh bn-umno termasuklah pr kerana mereka tergugat dan terancam. Ini kerana agenda malaya bakal terkubur dan penjajahan bakal berakhir selamanya di bumi Borneo ini.

Oleh itu, mohon semua untuk sebarkan kesedaran ini kepada semua rakyat Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak untuk tidak terpengaruh dengan mana-mana cubaan yang menggunakan sentimen perkauman dan agama untuk menjejaskan perjuangan SSKM. Ini kerana perjuangan SSKM melangkaui soal agama mahupun perkauman.

Ini soal TUNTUT HAK MUTLAK BANGSA NEGARA SABAH DAN BANGSA NEGARA SARAWAK!

Pergo Et Perago - Dum Spiro Spero

Read More

Sturgeon's likely rise will mean clean sweep for female leaders in Holyrood

A leading figure in the Scottish National party said on Saturday there was "no doubt" that the deputy first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, would be the next leader of the party after Alex Salmond.

That would lead to an unprecedented position in Scottish politics, with all three of the main parties led by women.

Ruth Davidson is leader of the Scottish Tories and Johann Lamont leader of Scottish Labour. Labour's shadow minister for women, Gloria De Piero, called it "truly groundbreaking".

The former SNP leader Gordon Wilson said there would only be an election if Sturgeon herself objected to being simply "crowned" without a vote.

Widely seen as having conducted herself well during the campaign for independence, and as a less divisive figure than Alex Salmond, Sturgeon said this weekend she could think of "no greater privilege" than to lead the SNP.

The party line-up would be in sharp contrast with what Jeane Freeman, a former Labour activist and founder of the successful Women for Independence (WFI) campaign group, has derided as the "men in suits" who hold the key to Scotland's future devolved powers – Ed Miliband, David Cameron, Nick Clegg – and the figure whom Scots are now calling the "fourth man", Gordon Brown.

WFI has more than 9,000 followers and its post-referendum meeting planned for early next month in Perth is so over-subscribed it is looking for a larger venue.

Freeman – whose robust exchange with TV political interviewer Andrew Neil over the NHS became a YouTube hit during the referendum campaign – has vowed to keep WFI going, saying: "We have enjoyed the past three years, and we're here to stay, whatever the result."

Other Scottish women played a prominent part on both sides: writer Lesley Riddoch, shadow Scottish secretary Margaret Curran, MSPs Baroness Goldie and Joan McAlpine, and MSP and columnist Kezia Dugdale. Even the Better Together election-night event was organised by an 18-year-old woman.

The Scottish parliament has achieved Nordic levels of female representation – 35% of its MSPs are women, although that has slightly dropped from what was called a "gender coup" in 1999 when the first intake of MSPs to the new Scottish parliament saw women make up almost 40%.

It puts the Scottish parliament in 22nd place in the world league table – comparing favourably with the House of Commons, which ranks 57th, with just over 20% of its MPs being women. Cameron's record on women in the cabinet is especially poor. The relatively high number of women MSPs is attributed by most to the use of gender quotas formally by Labour and informally by the SNP in the 1999 elections.

Some believe Margaret Thatcher increased women's involvement in politics in Scotland – many simply to oppose her. Dr Meryl Kenny, visiting fellow at the University of Edinburgh, believes Thatcher revived the devolution campaign north of the border. "The negative and gendered impacts of Thatcherite policies actually served to unite women from different perspectives, both inside and outside political parties," Kenny said earlier this year.

Lamont says Thatcher was far from a "sister" for women in politics although she proved that a woman could do the job for anyone who still believed they could not. "I would like to think that a lot of feminists like myself believed you didn't have to take the worst elements of male politics," she said.

De Piero welcomed the landscape in Scotland's emerging political scene. "The prospect of an all-woman lineup for the leaders of the three main parties in Scotland is truly groundbreaking, she said.

"With our Scottish leader and shadow minister for Scotland, Johann Lamont, and Margaret Curran, women's voices are front and centre for Labour in Scotland and we will continue to lead the way to make sure women are equally represented across all levels of politics – which is why over half of our candidates in target seats across the UK are women."

Paying tribute to Salmond, who announced his resignation on Friday, Sturgeon said she accepted that it inevitably raised the question of her succession, but insisted that she would not be making an immediate decision.

"I can think of no greater privilege than to seek to lead the party I joined when I was just 16. However, that decision is not for today. My priority this weekend, after a long and hard campaign, is to get some rest and spend time with my family," she said.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/20/nicola-sturgeon-scottish-independence-snp-women-leaders

Read More