There are demands for a new investigation into former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s behavior during the investigation into sexual allegations against Alex Salmond.

Calls for a fresh investigation into whether Ms Sturgeon broke the ministerial code came as critics said new documents, released after a long legal battle, cast doubt on initial findings about her behaviour.

Ministers ignored legal advice following inquiry into Nicola Sturgeon

Alba Party deputy leader Kenny MacAskill also claims that the records reveal that a civil servant may have been compromised during the initial investigation.

Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton has vowed to write to Scotland’s top civil servant in light of the ‘concerning’ revelations.

It comes as SNP Ministers were forced yesterday to release documents detailing the legal advice they received ahead of an unsuccessful challenge in the Court which cost taxpayers £30,000.

The documentation shows:

• Ministers ignored legal advice in a bid to cover up a report into Ms Sturgeon’s behaviour.

• Ministers gave incorrect information to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

• Serious concerns have been raised about the operational independence of a civil servant tasked with assisting James Hamilton, the independent counsel tasked with investigating Ms Sturgeon.

Last night Mr MacAskill said: ‘They (the Scottish Government) went to great lengths to prevent this information from being published. Now we know why.

‘They were warned by their own lawyers that there was not enough distance between the government and the independent investigation.

Former First Minister Alex Salmond was at the center of investigation

‘This casts a long shadow over the findings, some of which remain redacted. There is, at first glance, a case for reconducting the investigation, as this undermines public confidence in both the investigation process and its results.’

Two SNP stalwarts – MSP Fergus Ewing and former MP Joanna Cherry, KC – said in a joint statement that the revelations raise serious questions about who the Scottish Government is ‘trying to protect’.

Meanwhile, Conservative MSP Liam Kerr said: ‘Wasting money on an application that could fail shows the SNP’s complete disdain for taxpayers.’

The saga began in 2019 when Ms Sturgeon sent herself to James Hamilton over allegations he misled parliament about the date when she was notified of harassment complaints against Mr Salmond, who died earlier this month.

James Hamilton later produced a report saying Ms Sturgeon had given MSPs an ‘incomplete account of events’ despite not breaching the ministerial code.

A memo said John Swinney supported the objection

Benjamin Harrop, a member of the public, later submitted a freedom of information request to the government, asking for ‘all written evidence’ given to James Hamilton during its investigation.

The government insisted that it did not have information officially belonging to James Hamilton.

But after the case was referred to the Scottish Information Commissioner, the transparency tsar ruled that the information was held on Scottish Government systems.

Faced with the threat of disclosure of documents, Ministers approached their legal teams to overturn the decision.

New documents released after a bitter court battle with Mr Harrop and the Commissioner show SNP Ministers defied legal advice to wage a costly campaign to withhold information from the public.

Records show that in February 2023, the government was advised by the RoC’s James Mure that there was a “reasonable prospect of success” in appealing the Commissioner’s decision that the requested information was available.

According to one memo, then Deputy First Minister John Swinney was ‘inclined to object to the decision’.

But concerns later emerged that the information the government had provided to the information watchdog was inaccurate, according to Mr Mure.

He said that ‘while there are reasonable prospects on appeal… the additional information reduces the likelihood of success’, adding: ‘I do not think the prospects are particularly strong.’

Concerns were raised about the independence of the officer appointed to assist James Hamilton with his investigations, called ‘The Secretariat’, and the lawyer wrote that it was ‘unfortunate that greater distance was not exercised between the Secretariat and the Scottish Ministers’.

Scotland’s Information Commissioner, David Hamilton, said yesterday: ‘We have learned that ministers have been informed that the chances of winning this call are ‘not strong’ and are, in fact, diminishing as the advice evolves.

‘So it’s frustrating to know that my scarce resources are being spent on a call.

‘The applicant’s request for information regarding this appeal has been delayed for two and a half years; This is unacceptable and as a result the essential information originally requested is still under investigation.

‘I will correspond with the Permanent Secretary to share these concerns.’

The Scottish Government said: ‘The material shows that Ministers made decisions based on appropriate analysis of statutory considerations. This included discussions with the Lord Advocate, who was satisfied that appropriate grounds for appeal existed.’