THE Holyrood inquiry into the Alex Salmond affair has been told it can access court documents withheld by the Scottish Government.
The court service told MSPs they can legally get a large number of the files they want from the Government and Mr Salmond himself.
However the release of some other documents would require a court order being granted.
The development follows the inquiry recently losing patience with SNP ministers and trying to bypass the Government to obtain evidence it considers evidence “essential" to its work.
The inquiry is looking at how the Government botched a probe into sexual misconduct claims made against Mr Salmond in 2018, leading to him having the exercise set aside in a judicial review in January 2019 and leaving taxpayers with a £512,000 bill for his costs.
On 17 January 2019, Nicola Sturgeon gave an undertaking to parliament to “provide whatever material” the inquiry requested.
However her officials and ministers have since tried to block witnesses and withheld swathes of evidence, citing “legal privilege” despite waiving it for three judge-led inquiries.
Mr Salmond and the Government have agreed that the ‘open record’ of the two sides’ pleadings in the case can be released to MSPs.
However, earlier this month, after complaining of high-level “obstruction”, the cross-party inquiry wrote directly to the courts asking for access to further documents.
These included all evidence lodged by both the former First Minister and the Government, affidavits, pleadings, documents disclosed by a commission process, and all information about costs.
In reply, Pam McFarlane, director and principal clerk of session and judiciary, said that the various productions “generally remain the property” of whichever side lodged them with the court.
She said both the Government and Mr Salmond had already withdrawn or ‘borrowed’ their productions from the court, and could therefore share them with the inquiry.
She said the two sides could also withdraw more material and share that.
She said: “There still remain a large number of parts of process which I consider to essentially constitute productions, which might usefully be borrowed by the relevant parties and made available to you without further recourse to the court.
“I could request that the parties borrow their productions back, since the process is at an end, and it would then be a matter of requesting them to deliver them to you.
“As an alternative to parties borrowing their productions and making them available to you, the Committee, represented by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body, may wish to consider making an application to the Court for an order authorising access to the documents that the Committee wishes to consider in the context of fulfilling its remit.
“I can make no comment on whether such an application would be granted.”
The Scottish Government gave an undertaking to the court not to share its probe or the material behind it because it was so flawed.
However ministers have now said they intend to ask for a court ruling on the exact extent of that ruling in a bid to release material.
Mr Salmond's lawyers have said any breach of the undertaking would be a clear contempt of court.
The inquiry yesterday released a tranche of evidence from other key players in the Salmond inquiry, including Ms Sturgeon and her chief of staff Liz Lloyd.
Ms Sturgeon claimed she had “forgotten” about meeting Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff Geoff Aberdein in her Holyrood office on 29 March 2018.
The First Minister said the meeting featured “allegations of a sexual nature” and left her feeling Mr Salmond was “in considerable distress” and might well resign from the SNP.
He also wanted to speak to her “urgently about a serious matter”.
However, despite the far-reaching implications and the potentially seismic effect on her party and Government, Ms Sturgeon claimed the meeting later slipped her mind because it had happened on a busy day.
She said her meeting with Mr Salmond himself four days later had been the “significant” one.
When she later told MSPs about her contacts with Mr Salmond while he was under investigation by her officials, she mentioned three meetings and two phone calls with her predecessor, but not the meeting with Mr Aberdein.
Nor did she mention more than 40 WhatsApp messages between her and Mr Salmond related to the investigation and his unhappiness with it, which she also released to the inquiry.
The Scottish Tories called her account a “pile of nonsense”.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel