Whereas the Article 48 route has major advantages over the Article 49 route, and would be feasible – in my view at least – as a matter of legal principle, it would create many complications all the same, both for the Scots and for the rest of Europe.
To suggest that a nation that has followed the Scottish route should not be allowed into the European family while others with more dubious pedigrees are, would violate basic democratic principles. Effectively, Scotland would be expelled from the union for exercising a widely-recognized democratic right.
With the Treaty of Lisbon, the EU formalised and entrenched a right of exit (article 50) which is at the heart of its nature as a polity: the peoples of Europe have come together and will remain together by choice, not under duress. In the same way as the exit clause proclaims loudly and clearly that EU member states and their citizens remain in the EU by choice, leaving the EU should be a collective choice too. It should not be a choice inferred from another choice, that of one part of a country to leave the whole.
Constitutional, doctrinal and practical reasons why the EU has to negotiate after a Yes referendum.
Sionaidh Douglas-Scott’s reliance on Article 48 is far from persuasive on technical legal grounds (is it the correct legal basis to accommodate a new Member State?) as well as for strategic reasons (the negotiation process may well be dominated by the UK’s negotiating team pursuing its own agenda). But even if an independent Scotland’s continued membership in the EU were ‘smooth and straightforward’, Douglas-Scott provides no answer to the question as to what kind of member an independent Scotland would be.
It would be hugely ironic if the prospect of Membership in the Union ended up providing an incentive for an ethos of political disintegration. In seeking separation Scotland would be betraying the very ideals of solidarity and human integration for which Europe stands.
The comments below focus on the importance of an EU perspective on an independent Scotland’s EU membership, highlighting the EU as a distinctive, sui generis and new type of legal organisation. They argue that a strong case can be made for Scotland’s continued EU membership on the basis of EU law itself.
In weniger als zwei Wochen wird sich herausstellen, ob Schottland Teil des Vereinigten Königreichs von Großbritannien und Nordirland bleiben wird oder nicht. In den Umfragen liegen die Gegner der Unabhängigkeit zwar noch vorne, aber nur noch knapp und ihr Vorsprung schrumpft. Es könnte also wirklich passieren, was es bisher noch nie gab: Aus einem EU-Mitgliedsstaat werden zwei. Oder, werden sie?
In less than two weeks we will know whether or not Scotland will remain part of the UK. In the polls, the No camp still leads, but just by a slight and shrinking margin. It might actually happen what has never happened before: One EU member state becomes two. Or, will they?
Lebenslange Haft ohne Aussicht auf Bewährung in den USA ist unmenschlich und nicht mit der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention vereinbar. Kein Mitgliedsstaat darf daher einen Menschen, dem eine solche Strafe droht, an die USA ausliefern. Zu diesem Schluss kommt eine EGMR-Kammer in dem heute verkündeten Urteil Trabelsi v. Belgien.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters