Alex Salmond case controversy

In 2020 former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond alleged serious misconduct by Evans in her handling of accusations of sexual misconduct against him. Salmond won a judicial review of the Scottish Government's complaints process, which was ruled to be "unlawful", "procedurally unfair" and "tainted by apparent bias", and Salmond called for Evans to quit following the ruling. Legal bills cost the taxpayer £630,773, made up of a £512,250 settlement to Salmond from public funds for his legal costs, and the Scottish Government’s own legal costs of £118,523.^[7] After a High Court case, HM Advocate v Salmond, in which Salmond was cleared of allegations of attempted rape, details of memos sent by Evans emerged. She stated "We may lose the battle, but we will win the war.”, in relation to the case against Salmond, which he argued did not "seem the words of an impartial public servant", and he suggested it was evidence she had been responsible for the unlawful and biased complaints process.^[8]

The Scottish Government's website describes Ms Evans as being the principal accountable officer for the Scottish Government, with personal responsibility for the propriety and regularity of government finance and for economic, efficient and effective use of all related resources. It is for this reason that her role in the failed harassment enquiries against a former First Minister have been scrutinised. Noel Dolan, who was Nicola Sturgeon's senior special adviser when she was deputy first minister under Salmond, said Evans had to go for the "good" of the Scottish civil service, adding: "The original inquiry was a mess. Leslie Evans should stand down; she cost the Scottish taxpayer a large amount of money, and should have gone in 2019."^[9]

In January 2020, it was announced that Evans will remain in post until spring 2022.^[10]

After losing the judicial review, the Scottish government instigated an independent review by Laura Dunlop QC of the handling of complaints against current or former ministers. This reported in March 2021, recommending that investigation of complaints against former ministers should be fully independent as the current procedure was "self-evidently problematic", saying "the risks of perception of bias, either in favour of or against the person complained about, are obvious". Evans had previously said it would be "unusual in employment policies to have any independent element until after the procedure has been exhausted".^[11][12]

An inquiry by the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints concluded that an "individual failing" by Evans was instrumental in the collapse of the defence to the judicial review action by Salmond. It stated that the major errors were a failure to identify crucial documents early and choosing an investigator who had previous contact with the women complainants. It stated:^[13][14]

The Committee is conscious that the Permanent Secretary's office was identified as coordinating the supply of information for the judicial review and that the Permanent Secretary was one of a few people who had been aware of the prior contact of the Investigating Officer. It must be questioned why the Permanent Secretary in her role and with her knowledge did not ensure that the relevant information was extracted and processed at a much earlier stage. This individual failing is as significant as the general corporate failing already described.^[15]