Sarwar says he will release ‘Salmond Files’ if he becomes first minister

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said he would release “the Salmond files” if he becomes first minister, after the Scottish Information Commissioner threatened legal action over the Scottish Government’s failure to publish them.

The Scottish Government has been warned it risks contempt of court action after it missed a deadline to release files relating to an investigation into whether former first minister Nicola Sturgeon broke the ministerial code.

On Friday, Scottish Information Commissioner David Hamilton said the Government had told him about their decision just minutes before the deadline passed.

Mr Hamilton ruled last November that the Government wrongly withheld information relating to the probe into whether the former SNP leader breached the code in dealings with her predecessor, the late Alex Salmond, during harassment allegations, and told ministers they must release some of the written evidence used in the investigation by January 15.

He wrote: “I am of the view that the Scottish Government practice of last-minute communication on cases relating to the Hamilton Inquiry reflects poorly on the ministers and disrespects the applicant and wider Scottish public on a matter of significant public interest.

“If the Scottish Government fail to comply with my decision by January 22, 2026, I will not hesitate to refer the matter to the Court of Session.

“The Court may investigate the matter and treat the failure to comply as contempt of court.”

Mr Sarwar said the “culture of cover-up must end” and pledged that if elected he would release the files and called on First Minister John Swinney to do the same.

He said that £73,024 had been spent on fighting the information commissioner to keep the files secret, while £630,773 was spent on the Salmond judicial review, and listed other “doomed” ideas, including legal fees of £363,000 over the section 35 case.

More than £250,000 was spent on the unlawful independence referendum case, nearly £500,000 on the Named Person scheme and up to £774,000 in the For Women Scotland cases.

Scottish Labour leader Mr Sarwar said: “Scots are sick of seeing their money wasted to protect SNP secrets.

“Once again, John Swinney has authorised taxpayers’ cash to be used to block the release of documents linked to the Salmond investigation, despite repeated warnings from the Scottish information commissioner.

“The commissioner has warned that this legal action has little chance of success and risks wasting even more public money. But the SNP is carrying on regardless.

“This is not about one case. It is about a culture of secrecy and cover-up at the heart of SNP government.

“Time and again, SNP ministers ignore legal advice, lose in court, and then force taxpayers to pick up the bill.

“That is millions of pounds wasted, not on schools, hospitals, or policing but on hiding the truth.

“The obvious question is this, what are they so desperate to keep secret?

“If the SNP has nothing to hide, it should stop fighting the information commissioner, stop wasting public money, and publish the Salmond files.

“This constant secrecy, obstruction and cover-up is eroding trust in politics and costing Scots dearly.

“Scotland deserves better than a government that uses the courts to hide its failures.

“It is time for transparency, accountability, and the truth.

“As first minister I’ll publish the Salmond Files that the SNP desperately don’t want you to see, will John Swinney promise the same?”

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “The Scottish Government has lodged an appeal with the Court of Session challenging the Scottish Information Commissioner’s decision on a freedom of information request for evidence submitted to the Hamilton investigation.

“We consider that the Commissioner erred in relation to the law on whether the information can be withheld because it risks breaching contempt of court orders.

“The Scottish Government cannot release information which would amount to a contempt of court.

“It would otherwise not be appropriate to comment on what is now live litigation.”