Speaking to BBC’s The Nine on Wednesday, he said: “Even if, and in my view, it’s unlikely, the Scottish government managed to win their court case. That’s not the end of the UK government’s options to block independence.”
This week, Nicola Sturgeon laid out plans for a renewed case for independence with the launch of a new series of papers.
But Boris Johnson said he would not grant the Section 30 Order required to hold a second vote on the issue.
Professor Martin said the current stalemate between the UK and Scottish Governments is “completely different” to the discussions had surrounding the independence referendum a decade ago.
He said: “The fundamental difference between now and a decade ago is then the UK government was willing not just to concede a referendum but more importantly to contemplate the break up of the UK should the referendum be won by the Yes side.
“We’re now in a completely different situation.”
There has been speculation that the Scottish government would pursue a second referendum without a Section 30 Order.
Professor Martin added: “Let’s say for example, there is no agreement and there won’t be on a so called Section 30 Order, which is the way it worked a decade ago, and the Scottish government proceeds with its own bill, two things can happen.
“One is the Supreme Court blocks it, in which case it is unlawful to have the referendum. The other thing is, and there’s a lot of speculation that this is the Scottish government’s plan, there is a slightly weaker form of words and it’s about consulting the people to give the Scottish government a mandate and that might get through, it might not.”
“The UK Government and the Unionist parties could say we’re not going to take part. They could say we don’t care what the result of this sham referendum is: we’re not going to facilitate independence.”