Senior police officer ‘misinterpreted’ code before illegal spying

A senior police officer brought up concerns about seeking information on journalistic sources before Police Scotland acted illegally by breaching data guidelines.

Assistant chief constable Ruaraidh Nicolson, appearing before Holyrood’s Justice Committee, said a detective superintendent had given advice on the issue before an officer of equal rank “misinterpreted” a code of practice.

The Interception of Communications Commissioner’s Office (IOCCO) ruled the single force breached data rules in attempting to expose sources in the murder investigation of prostitute Emma Caldwell after media reports pointed to a leak.

The single force admitted last week in a letter to MSPs that senior officers were aware of the new rules before breaking them.

Mr Nicholson told the committee: “In general terms, I am aware that a SRO (senior responsible officer) did provide advice that these kind of applications potentially would breach the code.”

John Finnie MSP replied: “Why are we here then?”

Mr Nicolson said: “I would rather not be here and would rather that we had not breached the code - that would be the best possible position for use to be in, but unfortunately we have.”

He said police began investigating the leak in April last year, a month before the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland QC, ordered Ms Caldwell’s murder investigation be reopened.

Mr Nicolson made his appearance after the police refused to allow four senior officers to appear before the committee, citing concerns about their safety if their identities are revealed. This is despite the fact their names are already in the public domain.

Head of legal services at Police Scotland, Duncan Campbell, said in a letter to the committee published last week that the force’s Communicate Investigation Unit was made aware of the changes on February 24 and was instructed to “cease progression” of any applications pertaining to journalists.

Deputy chief constable Neil Richardson said detective superintendent David Donaldson misinterpreted the code on 25 March.