Calls for Sturgeon to face new probe over Salmond sex investigation

Demands are being made for a fresh inquiry into former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s conduct during the investigation into sex claims against Alex Salmond.

The calls for a new probe into whether Ms Sturgeon broke the ministerial code come as critics say new documents – released after a lengthy legal battle – shed doubt on the initial findings into her behaviour.

Acting Alba Party leader Kenny MacAskill also claims the records revealed a civil servant may have been compromised during the first investigation.

Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton has pledged to write to Scotland’s top civil servant in light of the ‘concerning’ revelations.

It comes as SNP Ministers were yesterday forced to release the documents which detail the legal advice they received before an unsuccessful challenge at the Court of Session which cost taxpayers £30,000.

The documents show:

• Ministers ignored legal advice in a bid to cover up a report into Ms Sturgeon’s conduct.

• Ministers gave inaccurate information to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

• Serious concerns were raised about the operational independence of a civil servant charged with helping James Hamilton, an independent advisor tasked with investigating Ms Sturgeon.

Last night, Mr MacAskill said: ‘They [the Scottish Government] have gone to great lengths to avoid publishing this information. Now we know why. 

'They were warned by their own lawyers there was insufficient distance between the government and what was meant to be an independent inquiry.

‘This casts a long shadow over its findings, some of which remain redacted. There is surely a prima facie case for the inquiry to be re-run, as this undermines public confidence in both the inquiry process and its conclusions.’

In a joint statement, two SNP stalwarts – MSP Fergus Ewing and ex-MP Joanna Cherry, KC – said the revelations raised serious questions over who the Scottish Government was ‘trying to protect’.

Meanwhile, Tory MSP Liam Kerr said: ‘Wasting money on an appeal likely to fail demonstrates utter contempt for taxpayers by the SNP.’

The saga began in 2019 when Ms Sturgeon referred herself to James Hamilton amid claims she had misled parliament over the date she was told about harassment complaints against Mr Salmond, who died earlier this month.

James Hamilton then produced a report which said that although Ms Sturgeon had not broken the ministerial code, she had given an ‘incomplete narrative of events’ to MSPs. 

A member of the public, Benjamin Harrop, later submitted a freedom of information request to the government, asking for ‘all written evidence’ handed to James Hamilton during his investigation.

The government insisted it did not hold the information as it was officially held by James Hamilton.

But after the case was referred to the Scottish Information Commissioner, the transparency tsar ruled the information WAS held on Scottish Government systems.

Threatened with the prospect of revealing the documents, Ministers scrambled legal teams to try to overturn the decision.

New documents – released after a bitter court battle with Mr Harrop and the Commissioner – show SNP Ministers went against legal advice to pursue a costly campaign to withhold information from the public. 

 The records show the government was advised in February 2023 by James Mure, KC, that there was a ‘reasonable prospect of success’ in appealing the Commissioner’s ruling that it did hold the information asked for. 

Click here to visit the Scotland home page for the latest news and sport

John Swinney, the then Deputy First Minister, was ‘inclined to appeal the decision’, according to one memo.

However, fears were later raised about government submissions to the information watchdog which appeared to be inaccurate, according to Mr Mure.

He said that while there ‘remain reasonable prospects in an appeal... the additional information makes success less likely,’ adding: ‘I do not consider the prospects are particularly strong.’

Concerns were raised about the independence of the civil servant charged with helping James Hamilton in his inquiries, named ‘the Secretariat’, with counsel writing it was ‘unfortunate more distance was not enforced between the Secretariat and Scottish Ministers’.

Yesterday David Hamilton, the Scottish Information Commissioner, said: ‘We have now learnt Ministers were advised that prospects of winning this appeal were “not strong” and indeed diminished as advice developed.

‘It is therefore frustrating to know that my scarce resources were absorbed in an appeal. 

'The applicant’s request for information to which this appeal related was delayed for two and a half years which is unacceptable and as a result the substantive information initially requested still remains under investigation.

‘I will be corresponding with the Permanent Secretary to share these concerns.’

The Scottish Government said: ‘The material shows Ministers took decisions based on appropriate analysis of the legal considerations. This included discussions with the Lord Advocate, who was content there were proper grounds for appealing.’