I didn't say it was right but if it started many years ago then it's been accepted by the UK govt by habit and repute.
Has this been 'accepted by the UK govt'? Evidence please.
As to restricting the meetings, imagine the meeting had been primarily to discuss an inward investment, if there is no chance to consider possible human rights violations of the investing govt, that seems problematic to the decision.
Sure - but that would require the primary purpose of the meeting to sit within the devolved powers of that body and I don't think that was the case here. If the article is correct the meeting was called to allow the Scottish Govt, through Robertson, to express their view on Gaza. And your example on trade, while theoretically correct (of course a devolved body developing an investment policy within devolved remit may reasonably take an interest in human rights records) this doesn't seem to be the case here as (again from the article) there did not appear to be a primary purpose for the meeting within devolved remit, where a side discussion on human rights would be reasonable.
I don't think the devolution settlement rules out such consideration or expressing it in such meetings, and as already covered it hadn't been stopped in the past.
I think the develoved settlements are very clear what is and is not a devolved power and by inference a devolved body and its executive can only act in an official capacity within that devolved remit. Individual ministers can, of course, express personal opinions but not express the official opinion of a devolved body outside of its devolved remit.
