STENCH OF A COVER-UP
Furious Salmond WON’T appear at inquiry after Crown Office forces parliament to censor part of his evidence
ALEX Salmond has pulled out of appearing before a Holyrood inquiry amid allegations of a Government ‘cover-up’. The former First Minister last night said it would be ‘impossible’ for him to address MSPs.
He spoke out only hours before he was set to publicly accuse Nicola Sturgeon’s closest allies of plotting to have him imprisoned.
It came after explosive evidence Mr Salmond submitted to the inquiry accusing Miss Sturgeon of misleading parliament was censored by officials.
Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross said: ‘The stench of a cover-up is overwhelming. The SNP Government and the Crown Office are shutting down scrutiny.
‘This is the most secretive, murky act yet from a ruling party of government that doesn’t respect transparency. The Scottish people and the Scottish
parliament deserve far better than this.’ The Scottish Parliament Corporate Body was forced to hold an emergency meeting yesterday after the Crown Office raised concerns over Mr Salmond’s submission.
Following advice from officials, Holyrood bosses agreed to censor the document – removing five of the 33 sections, totalling nearly 500 words.
The 36-page submission was initially published online on Monday evening by the Scottish parliament after weeks of manoeuvring over the former SNP leader’s evidence.
It was removed in its entirety yesterday morning before being reissued with a series of redactions.
In a letter to Holyrood officials, Mr Salmond’s lawyers said that as a ‘substantial’ part of his evidence had been ‘deleted without reference to him’, there was now a ‘significant legal impediment to his oral evidence’.
They added: ‘It is now clearly impossible for him to attend tomorrow in these circumstances, but he remains willing to attend on Friday.
‘He accepts that is entirely in the hands of the committee, to whom he has asked that we copy this correspondence.’ Mr Salmond’s evidence alleges there was a ‘deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort among a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned’.
Among those he claims acted against him are the First Minister’s husband and SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, her chief of staff Liz Lloyd and other senior SNP officials.
He also accused the Crown Office of ‘shielding some of the most powerful people in the country’.
This came after he received letters from officials warning he could face prosecution if he shared or referenced materials he had obtained for his criminal trial and had hoped to make public.
The Crown Office sparked a major backlash yesterday after advising the parliament to remove or redact Mr Salmond’s evidence.
Officials raised ‘grave concerns’ there could be a breach of a court order related to Mr Salmond’s criminal trial last year that could lead to the identification of women who complained against him.
They said it would be up to a court to decide whether or not this was the case.
But Holyrood bosses followed the advice and redacted Mr Salmond’s submission.
Five sections of the document have now been replaced with purple lines and ‘redacted’ printed on the pages. Other similar claims remain in the submission.
One of the paragraphs removed alleges Miss Sturgeon breached the ministerial code by making an ‘untrue’ statement in the Scottish parliament in 2019 – unrelated to the criminal trial.
The former First Minister has now offered to appear at Holyrood on Friday after seeking legal advice and guidance on what he can speak about without facing the threat of prosecution.
Mr Salmond and Miss Sturgeon are the only two witnesses who have yet to appear before the Holyrood inquiry examining the Scottish Government’s botched probe into harassment complaints against the former First Minister.
He had the probe set aside after legally challenging the investigation. A court then ruled it had been unlawful and tainted by apparent bias.
Mr Salmond was awarded more than £512,000 of taxpayer cash in legal fees. The Holyrood committee will meet today to discuss what action to take next and whether they could meet on Friday to hear from Mr Salmond.
Sources claim he was initially told he could attend the parlia-stood ment with special arrangements being made, as the building is currently closed on Fridays.
But this was later thrown into doubt by committee convener Linda Fabiani, and it is underMSPs will today discuss whether they wish to hear from Mr Salmond.
If they vote against holding an additional meeting, he will consider holding a press conference.
A Scottish parliament spokesman said: ‘Mr Salmond has informed the committee that he will not be attending tomorrow’s meeting to give evidence.
‘The committee will instead meet in private to discuss the implications of Mr Salmond’s response and the next steps for its work.’
Scottish Labour interim leader Jackie Baillie, a member of the committee, has called on the Lord Advocate and senior Crown Office officials to make an ‘urgent statement’ to parliament on why it had advised Holyrood to make redactions.
She said: ‘The committee must be able to see all relevant evidence if we are ever to get to the truth of the matter.
‘However, it has been reported that the Crown Office wrote to the Scottish parliament threatening the parliament with contempt of court action following the publication of Alex Salmond’s evidence.
‘Given that the Lord Advocate is in charge of the Crown Office and a member of the Government, he should be invited to come before parliament and make an urgent statement, along with the Crown Agent David Harvie.
‘Too much time and money has been spent on this sordid tale.
‘The committee must be able to get on with its work, unobstructed and without information being inappropriately withheld.’
A spokesman for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) said: ‘We take seriously our responsibility to uphold the law and to protect the dignity and rights of all those who come into contact with COPFS.
‘Scotland’s prosecutors have acted independently and in the public interest at all times when considering matters related to this case.’
‘Spent on this sordid tale’
THE stench surrounding the long-running Salmond affair grows not just by the day, but by the hour.
Alex Salmond last night called off his scheduled appearance before the Holyrood inquiry investigating the handling of sexual harassment claims against him.
This was the result of a row over his bombshell submission – accusing his former colleagues of a plot to have him imprisoned.
After Crown Office complaints, parliament removed the document from its website – before then replacing it with a redacted version.
The First Minister urged Mr Salmond to provide evidence to back up his serious allegations. But when he did it was withdrawn from the public domain.
The prosecution service – once revered – is supposed to be entirely independent, yet its head, the Lord Advocate, has a Cabinet seat.
Its intervention yesterday has reduced the Salmond inquiry to a laughing stock.
Truly, this is a shameful episode – and it cannot be resolved until Mr Salmond’s serious allegations are fully tested and explored.
Frankly, this is the kind of conduct we would expect to see in a banana republic.
It is utterly unacceptable in a 21st century parliamentary democracy.