THE Crown Office has urged Holyrood’s harassment inquiry to take down testimony from Alex Salmond that was published last night.
The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body is holding an emergency meeting just now to discuss the demand from prosecutors.
Reports suggest they've asked for substantial redactions and removal of material contained in the former First Minister's submission.
READ MORE: Alex Salmond claims senior SNP staff plotted to have him imprisoned
It's understood that in a letter to the parliament the Crown said they had “grave concerns” the published document was potentially in contempt of court.
A Crown Office spokesperson said they wouldn't confirm what they may have done about concerns they may have.
They said giving detail could worsen the potential impact of any breach.
A spokesperson for the Scottish Parliament said: “The Crown Office wrote to the SPCB last night. We have asked the Crown Office to clarify its concern so that we can respond today.”
The cross-party harassment committee is investigating the Scottish Government’s flawed probe into allegations of misconduct made against Salmond by two civil servants.
He had the exercise set aside in January 2019, with a judicial review declaring it “unlawful” and “tainted by bias”.
The Government’s botched handling ultimately cost the taxpayer half a million pounds.
At a later criminal case, the former SNP leader was cleared on 13 counts of sexual assault.
He is set to appear before MSPs at the Holyrood harassment inquiry on Wednesday.
If the submission is withdrawn or redacted by the parliament then it cannot make up part of the committee's final report, and can't therefore be used by MSPs when questioning Nicola Sturgeon or her predecessor.
In his written submission to the committee, Salmond accused a string of senior SNP and Scottish Government figures of trying to have him imprisoned.
He told MSPs: “It has been a matter of considerable public interest whether there was ‘a conspiracy’. I have never adopted the term but note that the Cambridge English Dictionary defines it as ‘the activity of secretly planning with other people to do something bad or illegal.’
“I leave to others the question of what is, or is not, a conspiracy but am very clear in my position that the evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned.
“That includes, for the avoidance of doubt, Peter Murrell (Chief Executive), Ian McCann (Compliance officer) and Sue Ruddick (Chief Operating Officer) of the SNP together with Liz Lloyd, the First Minister’s Chief of Staff. There are others who, for legal reasons, I am not allowed to name.”
Salmond said the “most obvious and compelling evidence” of the conspiracy was contained in material from his criminal trial that the Crown Office refused to release.
Sturgeon, Murrell and the other SNP and government figures named by Salmond deny his claims.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon says Alex Salmond doesn't have 'shred of evidence' of conspiracy
Last night a spokesperson for the party said: "This is just more assertion without a shred of credible evidence.
"Several of the women have already made clear how utterly absurd it is to suggest they were part of a conspiracy to bring him down. And yet Alex Salmond is still making these ridiculous and baseless claims and lashing out at all and sundry.
"People who supported him loyally for years and worked tirelessly to get him elected don’t deserve these smears. And women who made complaints about his behaviour - who barely merit a mention in his conspiracy dossier - most certainly deserve better."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel