Alex Salmond says shady behaviour of Nicola Sturgeon's government 'a disgrace'

“The behaviour of the Government was, in my view, a disgrace,” he said.

He also said he would take further steps against the Government’s top official, Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, for failing to disclose during two court cases that she had met one of Mr Salmond’s accusers and phoned another during the Government’s investigation.

He said he had been “astonished” she had done this “mid-process”, calling it “a serious matter which I intend to take forward with the appropriate authorities”.

Mr Salmond’s disputed claims appear in a newly-released 21-page submission to the Holyrood inquiry into how the Government botched a misconduct probe into him in 2018.

He had the exercise set aside in a judicial review at the Court of Session, showing it was “tainted by apparent bias”, leaving taxpayers with a £512,000 bill for his legal costs.

The Government’s mistake was appointing an investigating officer who had been in prior contact with Mr Salmond’s accusers - the person should have been new to the case.

Shortly after the Government’s defence collapsed in January 2019, Mr Salmond was charged with sexual assault but cleared on counts in a High Court trial in March last year.

READ MORE: Alex Salmond inquiry rules out publishing secret trial evidence

In his submission, Mr Salmond claims to have a witness statement saying that by November 2018 one of Ms Sturgeon’s special advisers said the Scottish Government knew that it would lose the judicial review “but they would ‘get him’ in the criminal case’.”

He also describes three meetings with Ms Sturgeon in April, June and July 2018 at which he repeatedly suggested a mediation process to deal with the complaints.

He claims that in the first meeting of 2 April 2018, the First Minister “suggested that she would intervene in favour of a mediation process at an appropriate stage” but “subsequently decided against such an intervention”.

Ms Sturgeon insists she refused to intervene as it would have been inappropriate. 

Despite the subject matter being a Government probe, Ms Sturgeon later told parliament she took the meetings in her capacity as SNP leader.

She is now being investigated to see whether she broke the Scottish Ministerial Code by misleading parliament, which would be considered a resignation offence.

Ms Sturgeon also told parliament in January 2019 that the first she learned of the probe was when Mr Salmond told her himself at her home in Glasgow on 2 April 2018.

She now admits it was at a separate meeting in her Holyrood officer four days earlier, 29 March, attended by Mr Salmond's former chhief of staff Geoff Aberdein.

She says she had “forgotten” about this meeting as it was a busy day at parliament.

She denies misleading Holyrood or breaching the ministerial code.

Mr Salmond said in his submission that the Scottish Government presented a misleading and partial picture of events to the court during the judicial review, leading its external lawyers to threaten to quit unless there was full disclosure of documents.

Mr Salmond wrote: “Documents were produced [late] which exposed many incriminating pieces of evidence against the government’s position.

“Furthermore it became clear that the Government’s position until that point on the nature of the contact between the Investigating Officer was untrue.

“We were also aware that the Government’s position introduced into their pleadings was that the first time the First Minster knew of the complaints against me was on April 2nd 2018 was also untrue.”

He went on: “The pattern of government lack of candour and a systematic failure to disclose has been deliberate and consistent since 7 March 2018.

“It continued through the judicial review process and then my criminal trial. 

“To my astonishment, it continues to date with a persistent failure to produce all relevant documents to the parliamentary Inquiry which has forced two Parliamentary votes [to btain Government legal advice] and triggered an unprecedented procedure under s.23 of the Scotland Act [to compel the production of Crown Office trail documents].

"It has also seen the recall of a number of government witnesses to clarify and in some cases correct their evidence."

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon faces Holyrood vote over husband Peter Murrell's snub to Alex Salmond inquiry

Mr Salmond said he had taken no pleasure in taking his successor's government but to court, but it had been done as a last resort.

He concluded: “In short, it remains a matter of deep regret that I had no option but to take the Scottish Government to the Court of Session.

"I did so very reluctantly and only after every other avenue had been exhausted. 

“But courts exist for a reason. They exist because when Governments act illegally there must be a remedy for the citizen. In this case, the illegality was finally conceded but only after a legal process which will have cost upwards of £750,000 of taxpayers money and which caused immense strain and distress to all involved. 

“The behaviour of the Government was, in my view, a disgrace.

"But actions have consequences. Accountability is at the heart of the Scottish Parliament. 

“The rule of law requires that those who have acted illegally are held to account. It is now the job of this Committee to resolve how that is best done.” 

A  senior Government source said: "Mr Salmond can't keep his story straight. It's coming apart at the seams amid a welter of contradictions, incoherence and shifting sands."

Mr Salmond is due to give evidence in person to the inquiry on Tuesday, with Ms Sturgeon having her say the following week.