Scotland’s top law officer has sent legislation on holding another referendum on independence to the UK Supreme Court.
Dorothy Bain, the Lord Advocate, was asked by Nicola Sturgeon to refer the bill to judges in London to decide whether the Scottish Government has the legal power to stage an IndyRef2.
But documents published today show that Bain "does not have the necessary degree of confidence" that MSPs can legislate on the issue.
Labour claimed it was "clear from the document that the Lord Advocate does not have confidence that what the SNP is proposing is legal".
The Scottish Independence Referendum Bill was published last week and states that SNP and Green ministers are planning to stage the vote on October 19 next year.
READ MORE: Thousands of Scots missing out on pension credits they are entitled to
But many legal experts have predicted judges will decide against the Scottish Government - meaning the referendum would not go ahead on that date.
The First Minister has threatened to turn the next general election into a "de facto" referendum if her plans are blocked by the Supreme Court.
Bain's reference to the Supreme Court states that it is necessary that relevant legislation would be within the competence of the Scottish Parliament.
It states: "The Lord Advocate needs to have the necessary degree of confidence that a Bill would be within devolved competence in order to 'clear' such a statement. In the present case, the Lord Advocate does not have the necessary degree of confidence."
Bain also stressed that any referendum held next year would not be legally binding, but would simply indicate the will of the Scottish people on the issue.
"The Bill does not stipulate what should happen in response to the result," the Lord Advocate wrote.
"The Bill provides only that the referendum should be held.
"Consequently, as a matter of law, the legal effect of a referendum held pursuant to the Bill would be nil.”
SNP MSP Neil Gray said: "There is a substantial majority in the Scottish Parliament in favour of an independence referendum and therefore a clear democratic mandate.
"However, as the First Minister set out last week, there remains debate over whether the Scottish Parliament has the powers to legislate to hold a referendum.
"A Supreme Court decision on the matter seeks to accelerate us to the point that we have legal clarity.
"We hope that it will be deemed to be within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. If that outcome is secured we will then introduce the Bill."
Scottish Labour MSP Sarah Boyack said: "It is clear from the document that the Lord Advocate does not have confidence that what the SNP is proposing is legal.
"With the country in the midst of a cost of living crisis, it is deeply disappointing to see Nicola Sturgeon return to the politics of the past.
"The people of Scotland need action from the Scottish government now, not more constitutional inertia."
Donald Cameron, Scottish Conservative spokesman on the constitution, said: "Now we know why the Scottish Government, shamefully, failed to allow the Lord Advocate to appear before Parliament last week, ahead of the summer recess – because Scotland’s top law officer is not confident that the First Minister’s plan to hold a divisive and unwanted referendum has any legal basis."
To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here.
