Spectator magazine wins legal challenge that could allow Alex Salmond inquiry to publish crucial evidence

A legal challenge brought by The Spectator magazine to clarify the scope of a court order from Alex Salmond’s criminal trial has been partially successful, leading to the potential for crucial evidence to be published by Holyrood's harassment complaints committee.

The Spectator magazine wishes to publish certain evidence submissions by Alex Salmond

Following a hearing at Edinburgh High Court on Thursday, Lady Dorrian agreed to change the order, but said she would set the exact reasons for the decision out in writing at the beginning of next week.

It could lead to the publication of crucial evidence from Mr Salmond and his former chief of staff Geoff Aberdein by the ongoing parliamentary inquiry into the Salmond affair.

However, the full extent of the impact of the changes to the order is not completely clear, nor whether the decision will actually lead to the committee publishing the evidence it has received from Mr Salmond and Mr Aberdein.

It is understood Mr Salmond’s legal team has written to the committee stating an intention to resubmit his evidence following the publication of Lady Dorrian’s decision in full, with a view to appearing in front of the committee next week.

The belief from the former first minister's camp is that the decision is a major step forward but that it would be reasonable for any decision by the committee to be delayed until after the judgement is published.

However, others believe that the judgement may not improve the chances of Mr Salmond’s evidence being published within the legal restrictions.

Pressure from Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives for an emergency meeting of the committee on the publication of the evidence will now intensify.

Arguing in favour of the order and representing The Spectator was Ronald Clancy QC.

The change to the order was not opposed by the Crown Office.

During the virtual hearing at Edinburgh’s High Court, Mr Clancy told the court the Crown Office had written to The Spectator on January 15.

The letter from the Crown followed the magazine's decision to publish in full Mr Salmond's evidence on the potential ministerial code breach by the First Minister on January 6.

The court also heard The Spectator had gained access to the submission in full from “another website”.

No decision has yet been made by the Crown Office as to whether to prosecute in relation to the publication of the evidence submission, Mr Clancy added.

The Spectator was asked to make appropriate redactions or remove the submission from the website in its entirety and to not publish the details of the letter as it itself would constitute a more serious breach of the order.

Following arguments from Mr Clancy, Lady Dorrian agreed to amend the order by adding the words “as such complainers in those proceedings”.

It now reads: “Made an order at common law and in in terms of section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, preventing the publication of the names and identity and any information likely to disclose the identity of the complainers in the case of HMA v Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond, as such complainers in those proceedings."

The order prohibited the publication of the names of the complainers in the case – a move that is required in Scotland to ensure anonymity for complainers due to there being no statutory protection of their identities.

In most sexual offence trials in Scotland, anonymity has been retained through a convention, rather than through the application of legislation.

Mr Salmond is understood to view the action as key to his potential appearance in front of the committee.

If his evidence is published, one barrier stopping the former leader of the SNP from giving evidence would be removed.

It is understood Mr Salmond may take part in a press conference – most likely next week – if he does not appear in front of the committee.

A message from the Editor:

Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

If you haven't already, please consider supporting our trusted, fact-checked journalism by taking out a digital subscription.