Irish lawyer James Hamilton completed an independent investigation of Nicola Sturgeons observance, or not, of the Ministerial code in the period between November 2017 and August 2018. His confidential report concluded she had breached the code, but not intentionally which satisfied the Holyrood Inquiry who cleared her of any wrongdoing.
A number of people submitted Freedom of Information requests in the years since the Inquiry seeking clarity on a number of issues. Of particular and on-going concern is that the Hamilton report issued for public consumpton was so heavily redacted it made nonsensical reading. Hamilton told Swinney he had wished his conclusions to be made public but they were not distorting the conclusions of the report. He issued a public notice expressing disppointment in the actions of the Scottish Government. The Government has since “stonewalled” every information request forcing the Scottish Information Commissioner to intervene and order it to release the information. It has failed to comply with the order and it is possible the matter will end up in the High Court. Another unnecessary and significant financial charge to Scottish taxpayers. But ” modus operandi” for Swinney.
The Hamilton Investigation was supposed to be completed independent of any input from the Scottish Government except that John Swinney would decide the extent of the remit. Many people, including the Salmon defence team expressed the view that the remit was unduly retrictive and would not get at the truth/ But their concerns were ignored.
Media revelations surfaced alleging that Swinney had tasked James Hynd’s office to provide secretariat support to Mr Hamilton. But Hynd was the Civil Servant who created precedence when he compiled the new novel procedure in November 2017, and the 8 drafts that preceeded it. Hardly an appropriate person in the circumstances that prevailed. Swinney was forced to remove Hynd from any involvment with the Secretariat. Hynd nominated one of his officers, a female to provide the secretariat services. The secretariat comprised one person.
Tha conduct of James Hamilton’s investigation took the form of an informal meeting with people that had agreed to meet with him. Secretariat support was present to record events. Hamilton, who retained notes of discussions for his own referral, (not shared with the secretariat), remained in Ireland throughout. Interviews were conducted entirely through the internet.
Swinney seeks to justify his refusal to release any other information from the Hamilton report on the premise thatt the material could identify complainers in the criminal court case against Salmond – which saw him cleared of sexual assault in 2020 – and this would breach court orders around anonymity for complainers.
Quite how he reached his conclusion is impossible to fathom given the near 3 year gap that elapsed between events well before Lady Dorrian issued her unprecedented “jigsaw” proclamation.
Addressing Swinney’s fear of a “jigsaw” breach, it is of note that the name of the “secretariat” officer has not been released despite numerous requests for this. It is to be hoped that she was not on Lady Dorrian’s list of protected participants. But given the Scotttish Governments past record their is more than an even chance she was.
caltonjock 