Chinese Whispers

It’s easy to think alternative websites don’t have impact but in fact I got news this week that the Derek Bateman Broadcaster blog has sent ripples through the international law fraternity.

Last year I wrote a layman’s rebuttal of the official British government legal advice on an independent Scotland produced by Professors Crawford and Boyle. (You know, the one that said Scotland didn’t exist, had been absorbed into greater England and the UK would be successor state with all rights and leave us with nothing etc).

http://derekbateman.scot/2014/03/26/an-auld-sang-gang-wrang/

anthony_carty

This was taken up and referenced by Professor Anthony Carty, Sir YK Pao Chair of Public Law at the University of Hong Kong Law Faculty and Professor of Law at the School of Law of the University of Aberdeen and by Mairianna Clyde, Associate Lecturer in Arts at the Open University. They wrote a serious legalistic analysis of Crawford and Boyle basing it partly on my blog. http://lril.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/08/12/lril.lru007.full.pdf

As a result I invited Tony Carty into batemanbroadcasting and interviewed him.

His paper was published by the London Review of International Law who informed him this week that it was the most read article of the year. The editor said it was quite an achievement as it was one of the later ones published. So an idea on a Scottish website to question the British government led to a legal, scholarly challenge creating an international interest. And I hear that the government in Beijing is also taking an interest in our alternative legal view of independence. (I don’t know a single Scottish mainstream media outlet who challenged the governnment’s legal advice).

Professor James Crawford SC Professor Alan Boyle

Annex A Opinion: Referendum on the Independence of Scotland – International Law Aspects

Professor James Crawford SC Professor Alan Boyle

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

10 thoughts on “Chinese Whispers

  1. MSM are just parrots, repeating what they are told, and going by their latest readership numbers, soon to be a Norwegian Blue.

  2. I expect the Chinese government is interested because of Thibet and Xinjiang and more to see how to counter it.

  3. Well done!

    I don’t know of a single newspaper or TV channel that, at the time, reported the report which stated:

    ‘3.7 For the purposes of this advice it is not neccessary to decide between these two views of the Union of 1707. Whether or not England was also extinguished by the Union, Scotland certainly was extinguished as a matter of international law, by merger either into an enlarged and renamed England or into an entirely new state.’

    This paragraph would have been screamng from the headlines in any other country in the world but the British media (and by that I include the Scottish mainstream media) completely blanked it.

    How many ‘No’ voters would have had a change of heart if they felt they were voting to effectively concur with the opinion that Scotland no longer existed?

  4. We don’t have a media. We have the propaganda wing of Westminster government.

    On the subject at hand… kudos Derek. 😀

    Neatly done.

  5. Power to you, Derek. The truth will out.

  6. Well done Derek,praise isn’t something you’ll receive from any British State outlet and that’s for sure.
    A nice piece on the National would be fitting though but for all that great news for the rest of the world to get their teeth into and show up the miserable non-entities that are the BT Propaganda cop-outs for what they are.
    I read somewhere it was England who were dissolved after 1707 and the Scottish only convened,not dissolved, their sovereignty till 1997 when it was re-convened by Winnie Ewing.
    Congratulations on a job well done.
    You deserve it.

  7. Congratulations Derek, more power to your pen! Hopefully “The National” will print more of your pieces. and get even more exposure.

  8. Nice one Derek , keep up the great work

  9. Steve Asaneilean

    Excellent Derek -but it brings into sharp focus once again how ineffectual our current crop of MSM journalists really are.
    They never question the Westminster agenda. They never check the veracity, seek alternative views or consider ulterior motives. Reporting verbatim is not journalism if it is not accompanied by enquiry.
    We do live in a democracy but sometimes it really is hard to tell…

  10. If Scotland was extinguished as a nation/country in 1707, why did Westminster consider it necessary to formally transfer (i.e. annexe) 6000 square miles of Scottish seabed to England, in order to claim the minerals under that area of seabed in the event of future Scottish regaining of its independence? It would not have been necessary to do this had the seabed in question been off the coasts of either Cumbria or Yorkshire.

Leave a Reply