Alex Salmond threatens to snub Holyrood inquiry over censored evidence

Tomorrow's evidence session has now been cancelled.

Mr Salmond’s lawyer last night wrote to the cross-party committee saying he was willing to appear up until February 16, when Ms Sturgeon is scheduled to testify.

However this would be conditional on Mr Salmond’s evidence being published, as without publication the material could not be included in the inquiry’s final report.

David McKie of Levy & McRae told MSPs the decision exemplified “the confusion and legal difficulties” created by the inquiry itself.

He said: “It must be clear to you that our client cannot accept a position where his evidence submitted in good faith to your committee (and in greater part still publicly available) is not to be published and there form part of the evidence leading to conclusions in your report.”

He also said Mr Salmond considered it "particularly offensive" that he was being asked to give evidence only on matter chosen by the inquiry on secret criteria.

Mr McKie accused the inquiry of putting Mr Salmond "in legal jeopardy" by asking him to give evidence without clear directions, given he has been threatened by the Corwn Office with prosecution if he shares material obtained for his trial defence.

He told convener Linda Fabiani: "Allowing our client to proceed without clear direction from you as convener is to place him in legal jeoopardy. We cannot responsibly do that. 

"Our client remains willing to give evidence to the committee at any point up to the final date for evidence (currently fixed for 16th February).

"However, he cannot take his oath to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth unless and until you properly address in writing the legitimatee concenrs set out in this and numerous prevous letters."

The ultimatum follows the inquiry last week refusing to publish a 21-page submission from Mr Salmond in which he says his successor broke the Scottish Ministerial Code - a resignation offence which she denies.

Despite the disputed claims already being in the public domain, parliamentary lawyers and officials blocked their release by the inquiry in case it breached court orders, data or privacy rules.

Mr Salmond said the “extraordinary” and “farcical” decision made a “mockery” of Holyrood’s commitment to openness.

READ MORE: Furious Salmond attacks Holyrood inquiry for not publishing his evidence

He consulted his advisers on Friday afternoon about “what to do now”. 

If he chooses not to appear in person before the inquiry, he is expected to call a press conference to air his complaints instead.

The inquiry will then have to decide whether to carry on in the absence of such a central witness.

The only other witness yet to testify is Ms Sturgeon.

A senior Scottish Government source said: "This is a put up or shut up moment for Alex Salmond and his move to duck the committee shows he's in no position to put up.

"The FM is ready and willing to be questioned on all aspects of this without fear or favour when she appears at the committee, and there's no good reason why Alex Salmond could not do likewise."

Liberal Democrat MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton, who sits on the inquiry, last week warned the inquiry was “in crisis” over the evidence issue.

He called in vain on Friday for an emergency online meeting to discuss it, but SNP convener Linda Fabiani refused on the grounds it was “impractical”.

READ MORE: Alex Salmond inquiry 'in crisis' over censored evidence, says member 

The inquiry is looking at how the Scottish Government botched its probe into sexual misconduct claims made against Mr Salmond by civil servants in 2018.

The former FM had the exercise overturned in a judicial review, showing it has been “tainted by apparent bias”, a Government flaw that left taxpayers with a £512,000 for his costs.

He was later charged with sexuual assault but cleared on all counts at a High Court trial last March.

After the Government’s defence of the civil case collapsed in January 2019, Ms Sturgeon admitted meeting Mr Salmond three times while he was under investigation by her officials.

She told MSPs the first she learned of the probe was when Mr Salmond told her at her Glasgow home on April 2, 2018. She then met him again in June and July. 

Each time he argued the complaints would be better resolved by mediation.

Ms Sturgeon told Holyrood that she had taken the meetings in her capacity as SNP leader, and so there were no government officials present and the meetings were not minuted.

After referring herself to the independent adviser on the ministerial code, James Hamilton, she is now being investigated over possible breaches of it.

The opposition parties say she failed in her duty to report the meetings fully and timeously to her officials.  

Mr Salmond recently made a detailed submission to Mr Hamilton asking him to broaden the Government-set scope of his investigation to look at whether Ms Sturgeon also misled MSPs.

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

Mr Salmond later shared the submission with the inquiry.

In it, Mr Salmond said some of Ms Sturgeon’s claims about their 2018 meetings were “simply untrue” and “untenable”.

He said Holyrood had been "repeatedly misled" about the nature of the April 2, 2018 meeting, and that Ms Sturgeon had helped arrange it four days earlier on the express understanding that it was to discuss the Government probe rather than SNP business.

He said the earlier meeting, on 29 March 2018, took place in Ms Sturgeon’s Holyrood office, where Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff, Geoff Aberdein, explained the background to her.

Mr Sturgeon later told the inquiry and parliament that she had “forgotten” about this earlier meeting, despite its dramatic content, as it had been a busy day at Holyrood.

Mr Salmond said in his submission: "The First Minister’s claim that it was ever thought to be about anything other than the complaints made against me is wholly false.

"The repeated representation to the Parliament of the meeting on the 2nd April 2018 as being a ‘party’ meeting because it proceeded in ignorance of the complaints is false and manifestly untrue." 

After Mr Salmond’s submission was made public, Ms Sturgeon’s spokesman accused him of trying to divert focus away from his own behaviour “by seeking to malign the reputation of the First Minister and by spinning false conspiracy theories”. 

A Scottish Parliament spokesperson said: “Mr Salmond has not confirmed that he will attend the Committee meeting on Tuesday and he has raised a number of issues for clarification.

"Tuesday’s evidence session will therefore not go ahead.

“Mr Salmond had been contacted to make it clear that he can speak freely in Committee about all of his contact with Nicola Sturgeon and his views on her actions. 

“He was given the opportunity to make a lengthy opening statement on Tuesday and would have had four hours to answer questions in public. He was also invited to send more written evidence for publication after the meeting.

“The Committee has already published two lengthy submissions from Mr Salmond and many, many pages of records and documents from him that he has been invited to speak freely about in Parliament on Tuesday. All of this written and oral evidence could then be reflected in the Committee’s report.

“The Committee continues to communicate with Mr Salmond’s representatives.”