Calls are being made for Nicola Sturgeon to face a new inquiry into whether she broke the ministerial code.
The interventions have been made by Acting Alba Leader Kenny MacAskill.
They follow the publication of legal advice by the Scottish Government today in relation to a long running freedom of information battle over James Hamilton's inquiry into whether Ms Sturgeon broke the ministerial code.
Ms Sturgeon had referred herself to James Hamilton – the independent adviser on the ministerial code – in response to allegations she had misled Holyrood in relation to the inquiry into the botched investigation of harassment complaints against her predecessor Alex Salmond.
Mr Hamilton ruled that she did not.
Legal advice obtained by the Scottish Government on its decision to appeal against a ruling by the Information Commissioner to release evidence submitted to Mr Hamilton's inquiry has now been made public.
In the documents published today lawyers raise concerns over the "distance" between the Scottish Government ministers and civil servants and the Hamilton inquiry.
“The Scottish Government have had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the Freedom of Information Commissioner to this point," said Mr MacAskill.
“They have gone to great lengths to avoid publishing this information. Now we know why. They were warned by their own lawyers that 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.”
They said: “These revelations show that the Scottish Government chose to spend huge amounts of money in pursuing a court appeal which their Counsel and head of legal services advised they were likely to lose.
"They also confirm that had they not appealed they would have had to respond to the FOI request to release the evidence that was provided to James Hamilton for his report on the Sturgeon case, and do so by 17th March, 2023.
"And these documents contain an admission that the Government misled the Commissioner by making a false assurance to him about access to the documents.
"This all suggests that the Scottish Government have been using the Courts and massive amounts of taxpayers' cash on lawyers fees, to delay the release of this material. This futile appeal - thrown out by the top judges in Scotland who didn’t even bother to retire from the bench to think over their decision - has resulted in a further 19 months delay."
It continued: "Now they will doubtless use further delaying tactics to argue exemptions from FOISA to continue to withhold the evidence requested under the Freedom of Information Act.
"This all raises the most serious questions as to what, precisely, the Scottish Government are trying to hide and, indeed, who they are trying to protect. The Scottish Government’s determination to conceal the truth contained in these and other documents, raises serious questions about their probity and integrity.
"The press statement issued today by the Scottish Government chooses to ignore these revelations and indeed pretend they do not exist by using the weasel words 'decisions were based on appropriate analysis of legal considerations'."
READ MORE:
- Lawyers warned Ministers over 'lack of distance' from Sturgeon probe
- Watchdog warning after SNP rebuke in Sturgeon Salmond FOI case
- Alex Salmond death: Court case and police probe to continue
- Allies' sorrow turns to anger with SNP
The statement added further: "This is just nonsense as a full reading of the papers show.
"The papers make clear that the decision to forge ahead was taken in March, 2023 by the then DFM John Swinney and supported by the then Minister of Parliamentary Business, George Adam. They took this decision despite the top advisers, Mure and Macniven both counselling that they would likely lose the appeal - and lose they duly did -in a humiliating and cursory dismissal by the top Judges in the land.
"Surely no ordinary person or business would spend a small fortune in a court action when told by their legal team they were likely to lose? The inference that is plain for all to see, is that the Scottish Government are continuing to use every trick in the book and a few that are not, in order to withhold the truth from the Scottish People. These attempts will , in our view, not succeed ."
It concluded: "The revelation that the civil servant who provided the Secretariat to the inquiry, was at the same time, continuing to brief and advise Scottish government ministers about aspects of the investigation, calls into question whether this was ever an independent inquiry at all."
The Scottish Government said the document showed that it took the decision to appeal over the Information Commissioner's ruling based on "appropriate analysis of legal considerations".
A spokesperson said: "The decision to comply with the Commissioner's decision and release the legal advice has been taken after careful consideration and does not set any legal precedent.
"The material shows Scottish Ministers took decisions based on appropriate analysis of the legal considerations.
"This included discussions with the Lord Advocate, who was content that there were proper grounds for appealing and who agreed with Ministers that the decision should be appealed.
"This was a complex and intricate point of FOI law, which the Court of Session's judgement recognised as addressing a 'sharp and important question of statutory interpretation'.
"The material reflects the thorough deliberation the Scottish Government gave to this matter."
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 hereComments are closed on this article