TWO litigation cases against the Crown Office related to the Rangers wrongful prosecution scandal are ongoing, MSPs have been told.
Compensation payments and legal costs have passed £40 million, which auditors described as “significant public spending”.
Administrators David Whitehouse and Paul Clark were arrested in 2014, though the Crown Office later dropped charges and admitted their prosecutions were “malicious”.
The Lord Advocate also admitted Charles Green and Imran Ahmad should never have been prosecuted, with Green receiving more than £6m in compensation plus legal costs.
READ MORE: Former Rangers star Joey Barton found not guilty of assaulting rival manager
Audit Scotland officials gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Public Audit Committee on Thursday.
During the 2020/21 year, costs of £40m were incurred in relation to a legal case stemming from the prosecutions.
Audit Scotland’s analysis of the Scottish Government’s annual accounts said the Crown Office had overspent its annual budget by £14.6m due to unplanned costs of ongoing proceedings.
MSPs heard from Audit Scotland officials (Jane Barlow/PA)
Committee convener Richard Leonard asked the auditors about the Rangers case, saying it accounted for almost all compensation payments made by the Crown Office during the financial year.
He asked if there were “fundamental concerns” about the Crown Office’s financial position.
Auditor General Stephen Boyle said: “It’s a significant amount of public spending.
“The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service accounts are consolidated into the Scottish Government’s accounts.”
He said he was reluctant to carry out further audits of the cases until a judge-led inquiry had taken place.
READ MORE: Two Rangers fans arrested after 'behaving disruptively' on EasyJet flight
Senior audit manager Helen Russell told the MSPs: “There are six cases involved, two of which have been fully closed and completed.
“A third case has been settled. I’m sure you will have read in the press that a fourth case has in fact been thrown out by the courts.
“That leaves two cases which remain ongoing at this point.”
Russell said she agreed the amount of money is “significant”.
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