This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25856657

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Scottish independence: Former European judge quizzed on post-yes EU plans Scottish independence: Lawyers divided over Scotland's post-yes EU plans
(about 7 hours later)
A former European Court judge has been questioned by MSPs who are looking at what Scotland's EU status might be in the event of independence. Lawyers, including a former European Court judge, have clashed over what Scotland's EU status might be in the event of independence.
Sir David Edward went before Holyrood's European and External Relations committee. A Holyrood committee questioned four legal figures on the Scottish government's EU proposals.
The Scottish government insisted it would negotiate a "seamless transition" into the EU 18 months after a yes vote. Three of the four argued that Scotland would have to apply for EU membership as a separate state.
The UK government believes a post independent Scotland would face tough membership negotiations. But Sir David Edward believed membership would require "relatively small" amendments to existing treaties.
As well as Sir David, the committee will also hear from former Scottish government deputy solicitor Patrick Layden QC; Professor Kenneth Armstrong, director of Cambridge University's Centre for European Legal Studies, and constitutional expert Aidan O'Neill QC. The European and External Relations committee is examining proposals for an independent Scotland's membership of the EU as set out in the Scottish government's White Paper.
The scrutiny of Scotland's EU future comes ahead of the Scottish independence referendum taking place on Thursday, 18 September. The Holyrood administration has insisted it could negotiate a "seamless transition" into the EU 18 months after a yes vote in the independence referendum.
Voters will be asked the straight "yes/no" question: "Should Scotland be an independent country?" Professor Kenneth Armstrong, director of Cambridge University's Centre for European Legal Studies, told the committee that the proposed treaty amendment would be "legally implausible and incredibly politically risky".
'Far less drastic' Prof Armstrong said: "Article 49 (on accession) is the specific legal basis for dealing with an entity acquiring the status of being a member state of the EU.
Sir David is known to be critical of the "theories" of senior European figures who insist an independent Scotland would have to renegotiate its re-entry to the EU as a new state. "Article 48 (on treaty amendment) is to me legally implausible as it is a way of renegotiating the treaties between existing member states, and not with some other non-member state."
Allowing Scotland to continue its membership would be a "far less drastic" solution than unpicking its current EU rights and then reassembling them, he said. 'Successor state'
However, Mr Layden was expected to tell MSPs that it was now "generally agreed that an independent Scotland would no longer be within the EU" while the rest of the UK would continue its existing membership. Patrick Layden QC of the Scottish Law Commission said that the UN accepted Russia as the successor state when the Soviet Union broke up and the EU could regard the break up of the UK in a similar fashion.
Ahead of the committee, he said: "I note Sir David Edward's query as to whether the correct legal analysis might not lead to the conclusion that both Scotland and rUK [Rest of United Kingdom] would effectively cease to be member states. It was possible that "the UK will remain a member state but Scotland will be outside the [European] union," he said.
"There seems to be a general acceptance that rUK will continue as a member state and, in international law, general acceptance by other states carries a great deal of weight." Pointing to interim or transitional arrangements, Aidan O'Neill QC, an expert in EU law, said the EU would not wish to deprive Scots of EU rights or deny protection to EU citizens living in Scotland. He said this would be a "nightmare scenario".
He added: "Something will be worked out, it always is."
EU figures including European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso and European Council president Herman Van Rompuy have suggested Scotland would have to rejoin as a new state.
The UK government has said a post independent Scotland could face tough membership negotiations.
However, Sir David said: "I was judge of the European Court for 14 years. I remember repeated occasions where politicians have asserted positions which the court has found to be wrong.
"There is a gap between the vote and independence, and in that period you have an obligation to negotiate a solution to the problem.
"That is ignored by Barroso, Van Rompuy and all those who talk about it."
The scrutiny of Scotland's EU future comes ahead of the referendum on Scottish independence.
On Thursday 18 September, voters will be asked the straight "yes/no" question: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"