Alex Salmond has said the Scottish Government is in for a “day of reckoning” as he launched fresh legal action over its botched investigation into allegations of sexual harassment against him.
The former First Minister has lodged a petition at the Court of Session, Scotland’s highest civil court, alleging “misfeasance” by past and present government officials, including his successor Nicola Sturgeon.
Mr Salmond’s lawyer, Gordon Dangerfield, said it would be asserted that the officials had “conducted themselves improperly, in bad faith and beyond their powers, with the intention of injuring Mr Salmond”.
As well as Ms Sturgeon, one of the public officials named in the action is Leslie Evans, who was previously Scotland’s top civil servant.
Mr Dangerfield added: “We aver that public officials decided at an early stage that Mr Salmond was to be found guilty of allegations against him, regardless of the actual facts.
“As events snowballed, we aver that public officials then took part in the criminal leaking of confidential documents, the concealment of documents in defiance of court orders and a criminal warrant, the misleading of the court during judicial review proceedings, the soliciting of false criminal complaints, and ultimately the commission of perjury at a parliamentary inquiry.
“All of this, we aver, was done for political reasons, and specifically to injure Mr Salmond.”
The action will be the second time that Mr Salmond has taken the government he once led to court over its investigation into claims made against him by several women, which he has always denied.
He previously won a judicial review against the Scottish Government over the same issue. In January 2019, a judge ruled that the investigation had been unlawful, describing it as “procedurally unfair” and “tainted with apparent bias”.
As well as finding in Mr Salmond’s favour, the judge also ordered the Scottish Government to pay his legal costs, which amounted to £512,000.
Criminal allegations against the former First Minister later followed, which he also denied, and in March 2020 he was acquitted of all 13 charges by a jury after a trial at the High Court in Edinburgh.
A Holyrood committee then investigated the debacle of the botched Scottish Government investigation. In March 2021 it concluded that Ms Evans should be held responsible for the “devastating” collapse of the legal case.
Its report also said that Ms Sturgeon had misled Holyrood with an “inaccurate” claim that she never told Mr Salmond she would intervene in the government investigation.
It also said it found it “hard to believe” she did not know of concerns about his behaviour before November 2017, when she claimed she was first alerted by a media query.
Mr Salmond said on Friday: “Throughout this tawdry business I have done my talking in court or in front of Parliament.
“That has resulted in victory in the Court of Session and being cleared of all charges in the High Court of Justiciary. I intend to continue with that practice.”
He said the case was intended to address the fact that “not one single person has been held accountable” for anything that had happened.
“With this court action that evasion of responsibility ends,” he added. “The calling of the action signals that the day of reckoning for the Scottish Government’s record of misfeasance on this grand scale will inevitably come.”
Speaking at a press conference at the British-Irish Council in Dublin on Friday, Humza Yousaf initially refused to be drawn on the case, but added: “Unsurprisingly to anyone listening or watching, the Scottish Government will defend its position robustly, but I’ll say no more because that’s a live case.”
A Scottish Government spokesman said: “It would not be appropriate to comment on live litigation.”
A spokeswoman for Ms Sturgeon said she “utterly refutes” Mr Salmond’s claims.
“She answered questions before a parliamentary committee for eight hours in 2021, and was also investigated and cleared by the independent advisor on the ministerial code,” she added.
“Salmond’s actions are a matter for him, and the conduct of the case is a matter for the Scottish Government.”