Lord Advocate 'to fully set out' communications amid Murrell case row

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) said the Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain KC, is “committed to ensuring that Parliament is properly informed”.

It comes after opposition politicians alleged Ms Bain had handed the First Minister a political advantage by revealing details of the allegations against former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell.

In a memo sent to Mr Swinney in January, she said Mr Murrell – who is Nicola Sturgeon’s estranged husband – had been charged with embezzling almost £460,000 from the party. This figure was not public at the time.

She told MSPs the email was to inform Mr Swinney of a “significant development” in the case and to “ensure the government is reminded of its legal responsibilities to restrict its comments”.

However, opposition politicians claimed it gave Mr Swinney a political advantage, and Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie has now written to the First Minister’s independent advisers on the ministerial code alleging a potential breach of the rules.

A spokesperson for the COPFS said: "The case against Peter Murrell is active, and caution must be exercised about commentary which may give rise to prejudice to the administration of justice.

"The Lord Advocate is committed to ensuring that Parliament is properly informed. She undertook to provide Parliament with additional information and will do so [on Tuesday].

"In communicating further with the Parliament, the Lord Advocate will fully set out the communications had with government on this case. She will also provide examples of other instances where the government have been advised of matters related to the Crown's independent handling of cases.

"She will confirm that she has had no involvement in case decisions but remains the appropriate conduit for communication from the Crown to the government."

The Lord Advocate serves as the head of prosecutions in Scotland, as well as the government’s chief legal adviser. On Friday, UK Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch vowed to split these functions after raising concerns over “corruption”. She called the current arrangement an “absurd state of affairs”.

READ MORE: Kemi Badenoch vows to split dual role of Lord Advocate amid 'corruption' row

In her letter to the independent advisers, Ms Baillie raised questions about whether the Lord Advocate misled Parliament, whether information was improperly disclosed to the First Minister, and whether appropriate safeguards were in place to prevent political advantage.

She wrote: “I am concerned that the Lord Advocate’s handling of this matter raises serious questions about the accuracy of what was said to Parliament and whether the First Minister and his political advisers received access to prosecutorial information that was not available to the public and media, creating a potential political advantage.”

She added: “It has been reported that the Lord Advocate disclosed to John Swinney information about the prosecution that was not in the public domain, and that this information was shared with SNP advisers.

“That is profoundly troubling given the constitutional sensitivity of the Lord Advocate’s dual role and the need to maintain confidence in the independence of prosecutorial decision-making from political interests.

“My concerns are compounded by what the Lord Advocate told Parliament. She stated that, from the point at which an indictment is served, ‘there is no limitation on its terms being made public’.

“However, after the Lord Advocate had notified the First Minister, the Crown Office position communicated to the media was the opposite in substance: ‘The indictment is not a public document until it is presented in open court.’ These statements cannot both be correct.”

Ms Baillie said there were “further serious questions about process and propriety”, adding: “If the Lord Advocate was recused from this matter, why was she corresponding with the First Minister about it at all?

“If the communication was said to be for the First Minister only, why was information shared with SNP advisers, and what steps were taken to control onward disclosure?

“And if the Crown Office would not provide the same information to the media on the basis it was not public, how can it be justified that the First Minister and SNP advisers were placed in a privileged position?”

She said it was “essential that transparency and candour are prioritised over political management”.

READ MORE: Swinney launches staunch defence of Lord Advocate over 'corruption' row

Her letter concludes: “I would be grateful if you could provide the First Minister with independent, impartial advice on how this matter should be handled, including whether the Lord Advocate should correct the record and whether further steps are required to protect confidence in prosecutorial independence.”

Mr Swinney previously launched a staunch defence of the Lord Advocate.

“Dorothy Bain is an outstanding prosecutor, she is an outstanding lawyer, she has 40 years of unimpeachable service to the public interest in Scotland,” he told MSPs.

“She alone is responsible for more cases of sexual violence of men against women being brought to justice than any other person, and I put on record today my absolute confidence in the Lord Advocate in undertaking her duties.”

He said he was “disgusted” by some of the “contemptible rubbish” opposition politicians were saying in Holyrood.

In a letter to Ms Bain on Monday, Labour MP Gregor Poynton asked about other instances in which she had briefed the First Minister about “live or ongoing criminal proceedings”.

He wrote: “Given the unique constitutional position of the Lord Advocate as both head of the prosecution service and a member of the Scottish government, public confidence in the independence and impartiality of prosecutorial decisions is of paramount importance. Greater clarity on the precedent and process surrounding such communications would help ensure that confidence is maintained.”