Complaints at the heart of Salmond Inquiry ‘ yet to have outcome’ claim
H a r a s s me n t c o mp l a i n t s against the former first minister Alex Salmond are considered open and without an official outcome, it has emerged.
T h e S c o t t i s h G o v e r n - ment made t he admission in response to a Freedom of Information request from The Scotsman in which it stated it could not disclose the decision report following the initial investigation because it was “not held”.
Officials later said the outcomes of the complaints had “not yet been reached” by the Scottish Government.
This suggests they remain open and are subject to the same flawed complaints procedure that led to the successf ul Judicial Review action brought by Mr Salmond.
That case, which is at the hear t of t he parl i amentary inquiry, cost the taxpayer more than £ 500,000 in legal costs after it was conceded by the Scottish Government.
Officials had initially refused to release the decision notice and any details about any possible meetings held between civil servants and Mr Salmond due to concerns around data protection and potential contempt of court.
However, an appeal of the decision led the Scottish Government to drop those concerns and claim it simply did not hold the information.
Officials said: “Accordingly, the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested … because an outcome has not as yet been reached in relation to either complaint.”
The parliamentary inquiry into the handling of harassment complaints by the Scottish Government has faced significant difficulty in gaining information from the Scottish Government around the judicial review, with members criticising a lack of transparency and openness.
On Wednesday, the Scottish Parliament voted for a second time for the Scottish Government to release legal advice to the committee, something it has so far refused to do pending an official process in line with the ministerial code.
Jackie Baillie, the Scottish Labour member of the committee, said the Scottish Gove r nment was usi ng e ve r y opportunity to stop information being made public.
She said: “This is just another example of the secrecy and obstruction that the committee has faced.
"It strikes me that they are using ever y opportunity to close down on information getting out i nto t he public domain even through Freedom of Information.
"I t i s t i me t hat t he S c ottish Government stop hiding behind Freedom of Information legislation or legal privilege and come clean with the committee because we need to know exactly what happened and when.”
The Scottish Liberal Democrat representative, Alex Cole- Hamilton, labelled the disclosure “astonishing” and questioned why the Scottish Government viewed the complaints as unfinished.
He said: "I find it astonishing that two years after the judicial review collapses, this is still unfinished business for the Scottish Government.
" I hop e ve r y much t hat t h e S c o t t i s h Gove r n ment has b e e n i n c l ose c ontact with t he women t hat t hey so terribly failed as a result o f t h i s b o t c h e d p r o c e s s .”