Police Scotland denies attempts to frustrate inquiry into spy scandal

The head of Police Scotland’s legal team has denied suggestions that emails and the addresses of retired officers were withheld during an investigation into a spying scandal.

Senior figures from the national force were called to give evidence before MSPS following an appearance last month by Durham Constabulary’s chief constable, Mike Barton.

Mr Barton was asked to investigate after Police Scotland’s now defunct Counter Corruption Unit (CCU) breached guidelines attempting to establish the source of media reports about failings during the inquiry into the unsolved murder of Emma Caldwell.

In evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s justice subcommittee on policing, he said Police Scotland “prevent- ed” him from carrying out his work.

But appearing before the committee yesterday, Police Scotland’s interim head of legal services, Duncan Campbell, denied withholding emails needed for the investigation as well as the home addresses of retired senior officers who were required for interviews.

Mr Campbell told MSPS the material requested by the Durham investigators was legally privileged, requiring a decision by the chief constable for privilege to be waived before being released.

He said: “I indicated to the chief constable if he was so minded (to waive legal privilege), he might wish to avail himself of independent legal advice. I didn’t withhold any material that (Durham) asked for that I was in a position to provide.”

Durham Constabulary was brought in to investigate after the Interception of Communi- cations Commissioner’s Office (Iocco) said Police Scotland had been “reckless” in failing to obtain judicial approval when trying to access communications data.

Following the Durham investigation, Police Scotland instructed the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) to carry out a misconduct investigation, which eventually led to seven officers being cleared of wrongdoing.

Deputy Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick told the committee that four of those officers were subject of “improvement action” while the remaining three, who she said were “peripheral” figures, had no further action take against them.

Of the four complainants, two serving and two retired officers, she said: “I feel we failed them as an organisation and that we continued to fail them by not being in contact. I continue to offer them my wholehearted apologies.”