Police probing civil servant's statement under oath in Salmond inquiry, court hears

Context

In 2019, the Court of Session ruled the Scottish Government’s handling of complaints against Salmond was ‘unlawful’
The Scottish Government paid out £512,250 in legal costs to the former first minister
In 2020, Salmond was cleared of sexually assaulting nine women while he was first minister
In 2021, Holyrood held an inquiry into the Government’s unlawful investigation of Salmond
In 2022, the Government published a new grievance policy for staff
In November 2023, Salmond launched a new legal case against the Scottish Government over its botched probe

Police are probing whether a senior civil servant “gave a false statement under oath” to an inquiry set up to investigate sexual misconduct allegations involving Alex Salmond, Scotland’s highest court has heard.

Lawyer Gordon Dangerfield told a Court of Session hearing on Friday that detectives are investigating the alleged conduct of James Hynd.

Mr Dangerfield is representing the former first minister in an action which he has brought against the Scottish Government.

Salmond is seeking “significant damages” and compensation for loss of earnings that could total millions of pounds from ministers.

The Scottish Government paid out £512,250 in legal costs to Salmond after the Court of Session ruled its handling of complaints against him was “unlawful”.

Salmond was cleared of sexually assaulting nine women while he was first minister in a separate criminal trial in 2020.

The former SNP leader is alleging “malfeasance” by various former and current Scottish Government civil servants with his legal team arguing that they “conducted themselves improperly, in bad faith and beyond their powers, with the intention of injuring Mr Salmond”.

Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon is among the senior figures accused. She has vigorously denied being part of a “cover-up” or “conspiracy”.

On Friday, Mr Dangerfield told Lord Fairley that the Police Scotland investigation is called Operation Broadcroft and it is being headed by a senior detective.

The solicitor advocate told Lord Fairley that the investigation is looking at the alleged behaviour of Mr Hynd.

Mr Hynd was described in August 2020 as being the Scottish Government’s head of cabinet, parliament and governance.

A Police Scotland spokesperson told STV News: “We are investigating a complaint in relation to evidence provided to a Scottish Parliament committee.

“These enquiries are ongoing and we are unable to comment further.”

It comes after Salmond is said to have made a “criminal complaint” regarding the alleged malfeasance.

Salmond’s lawyer asked Lord Fairley to pause the case at the Court of Session to allow for the police investigation to conclude.

Mr Dangerfield said he feared Operation Broadcroft may uncover evidence which could disadvantage the officials at the centre legal action.

The court heard that if successful, this would be the fourth time the case would have been paused since being brought in November last year.

Lesley Shand KC, advocate for the Scottish Government, urged Lord Fairley to reject the request for the pause to be extended.

The judge refused the request to extend the pause.

He said: “If any stage during that process any party identifies a risk of prejudice to the police inquiry, parties are at liberty to bring the matter back before me to revisit the decision on whether or not there should be a decision for further procedure in this action – but for the moment I am completely unpersuaded by the mere fact of an ongoing police investigation; the outcome of which we simply cannot guess at comes anywhere close to meeting the test required to maintain a sist in place.

“For those reasons, I will refuse the motion to continue the sist and make an order for defences to be lodged within seven days.”

The Scottish Government moved for Salmond to pay for the legal costs of Friday’s hearing.

The judge agreed describing the pre-motion correspondence about the requested pause as “unnecessarily belligerent and unhelpful”.

The Scottish Government has been asked for comment.