In a perfectly timed moment of great historical significance, King Charles III swore his allegiance to the Scotland’s Claim of Right, a cornerstone of Scotland’s constitutional framework, rights and safeguards, on this day, the 10th of September, 2022.
He upholds the right of the people of Scotland to choose to have or not to have a monarchy, and moreover that Scotland is a separate country, as is England. By the act the king recognises both nations are bound only by a trade and foreign policy treaty, and a collection point of tri-national taxes that includes Wales.
“The Claim of Right is unchallengeable as is the Declaration of Arbroath, not only when they were written on parchment and signed by the nobles and clergy of Scotland, but inviolate in this moment and forever after. They state unequivocally the elected government of Scotland of whatever hue is in service of the people and at the will of the people, who are indisputably sovereign.” Gareth Wardell
“It can hardly be argued that the Claim of Right is merely a historical curiosity, when one of the first acts of the new King is to be required to swear an oath to uphold it! This is the sort of history which can shape the future.” Right Hon Alex Salmond MP
“The new king must swear to uphold the Claim of Right. Presumably his predecessors did likewise. The constitutional implications of this commitment may need to be addressed. John Drummond
“Seems Charles Windsor missed the ‘Don’t mention the Claim’ memo.” Awkwardwestie
“This moment marks the shortest essay I have ever published, and the most momentous, accepting a few lines can constitute an essay.” Grouse Beater
In support of Scotland’s right to reinstate self-governance, please send this article to friends. Thank you.
************************************************
Grouse Beater 
Reblogged this on Ramblings of a now 60+ Female.
At last the monarchy has a reason to exist – to uphold our right to be free of the monarchy.
Thank you for this, a useful reminder of details that, I hope, could make the essential difference in overcoming likely biased, manipulated, hostile legal challenges to Scotland’s right to independence if we choose. I just hope the present Scottish government and other influential pro-independence campaigners are also awake to things like this, even if they are sadly lacking in other important strategic planning, as it appears to me (I keep hoping I’m wrong and that a giant killer rabbit will be pulled snarling from the SNP/Green hat… ). I think the central issue of the right to self-determination, not just to express the desire for or against it, is something they (Scotgov)need to push the agenda towards, not get pulled off track by the inherent practical issues (currency, borders, pensions etc) that are of course vitally important but are not, in my view, relevant to the question of the right to govern ourselves.
Good points, GB. He is Charles III King of Scots as well as King Charles III of England, Wales and NI. The two roles are separate in one monarch, and it is fitting that Charles should recognise that and pay obeisance to Scottish constitutional principles to which he owes his existence as King of Scots. He is smart. By not antagonising the Scots, he may well be hoping that they will choose to continue with the monarchy on independence, even if that monarchy is shared with rUK, rather than opt for a republic.
The other upside is, of course, that even die-hard Unionists, set an example by the King, can stop their despicable contempt for truth where Scotland is concerned. Should his son, William come to the throne as King of Scots, as William V (William I, II, III, of England, and IV, King of Scots and of England) the same problem will arise as with Elizabeth II: he will be William III King of Scots (William the Lion, I of Scots, William IV, II of Scots) his predecessors).
What is less certain, and remains to be seen, is whether Charles will stick rigidly to his constitutional role and not interfere (in adverse ways) in Scotland’s right to self-determination as, reputedly, his mother did. I would imagine that pressure would be brought to bear by the British Establishment, but he might be unwilling to acquiesce, which would show character and an acceptance of the reality of the situation.
Unionists are English nationalist of the worse variety they have dragged us down their rabbit hole creating a undemocratic racist country. They are in denial that we are a colony in a feudal society constructed for an elitists establishment hell bent on keeping us under their imperialist boot. Why do they fear democracy because they know they have exploited us stole from us rapped our resources and stuffed us at every oppurtunity.We dont need their false Gods or Kings .Dissolve the corupt ,rotten to the core Zombie Union .
since the Sovreign swearing to uphold the Claim of Right is part of the Accession Ceremony, Westminster Parliament could not do anything but endorse it in the Commons debate in July 2018
My thoughts regarding Royalty might stock a large library? However, it’s simpler to just ‘write’ a few paragraphs including the word ineffable. however, while times change, so do international events… Including the so-called UK; and just now I see that the new King Swears Oath to ‘Claim of Right.
I’ve no doubt that this is bound to have huge reactions from everyone on this archipelago – whether Unionists or people who are more in favour of self-determination. Recently, I’ve been posting: “Poblachail”/”Republican” ‼💓 🏴 A simple statement… Simple enough, but also serves as a starting point for future discussions.
‘Future discussions’ are going to be open to everyone in each of the areas involved – mainly Scotland and England – and who can tell what these relationships will be in future? The Claim of Right is being referred to in this day and age and echoes important points from centuries ago; points that really touch today’s people living in both Scotland and England.
Presently, it’s wonderful to realise that we normal people – Mr, Mrs Ms and suchlike will be actively involved in what had been anticipated by our forebears… We, the normal people, can determine our nation’s future!
This is why we need no #SCRM
We have the Claim of Right and a Constitution.
We need to USE IT
Charles pledging to adhere The Claim of Right is a game changer. The up coming court case involving the Referendum and whether its legal or not is for the birds, because the UKG QC has stated that these documents no longer have standing or any legal effect today, now if this was true Charles wouldn’t be needed to swear an oath to the claim of right and he did and if the UKG could have removed Charles taken oath to the claim for right they would have done it and they didn’t because its as important in the 21st century as it was in 1689.
Now I’m no legal expert, but reading between the lines this act by Charles shows that that the Scotland act and any act that parliament passes including a referendum act the people of Scotland can deny it as we could deny Charles being king. Its obvious to me that the Supreme court would have to adhere to the treaty of Union and the claim of right and let’s see how the SNP argue their case to the Supreme court and what the SG QC says after this revelation.
The family of Yes supporters should use the 18.09.22 in George square to uphold the Claim of right and to denounce Charles III as our king, if the claim of right has to much importance its time we (the People) should be telling sturgeon and her government what’s she to do instead of her telling us.
It will be interesting how the Supreme court deals with the upcoming court case and the judgment it makes, It will be more important to see how the SNP and SG reacts, this is when we truly will see the traitors and redcoats within our ranks.
Dear YesToIndy, your readers are happy to agree with the spirit of your words and we love being ‘The Family of Yes’… Your opening words stated that The Claim of Right is as important in the 21st century as it was in 1689… That has been true throughout that time and it will be in perpetuity; therefore, no politician, political party or jurisdiction can go against a sovereign body.
In modern democracies, sovereign power rests with the people and is exercised through representative bodies such as Congress or Parliament… Scotland’s population are held to be sovereign people and who can legitimately deny that? However, in this day and age, we are uncomfortably aware that England’s government has spoiled the terms of the Acts of Union, passed by the English and Scottish Parliaments in 1707, that led to the creation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain on 1 May of that year.
Almost anyone can look into these vitally important matters nowadays and amongst our electorates, there’s no shortage of practical and logical people who’ll be willing and able to draw their own conclusions from what they witness in the less than impressive performances of ‘parliaments’ that operate in England and Scotland. These two are neighbouring counties – but diametrically opposite nations.
Unfortunately, the creation of the United Kingdom came about despite the Scottish people rioting… In an age that was centuries before what we can recognise today; yet, while we are geographically united areas, the future is certainly going to be entirely different and we can best hope for a friendlier and peaceful future.
Did you know that the Claim of Right is the only act ratified by both parliaments that carries a death penalty for anyone who disavows it .
Many other facts and how we organise is at http://www.salvo.scot
I think this cheered me up , though I’ll have to give it time to filter through.
Sovreignscots1320 , really did cheer me up!
Why are we still going cap in hand when we are SOVEREIGN why is this not been shouted from the rooftops.,