THE Scottish Government’s flawed defence of its botched investigation into harassment complaints against Alex Salmond was the result of “a collective organisational failure,” according to new documents released by the civil service.

The frank admission is contained in a 2018 report by the Government’s then Director General for Organisational Development and Operations.

The paper has been shared with the Holyrood committee investigating the botched probe and the subsequent judicial review.

It contains some of the legal advice shared with ministers during the court battle.

The former First Minister took the government to a judicial review following an investigation into two complaints of harassment.

He had the whole exercise set aside after it emerged that the civil servant appointed as Investigating Officer (IO) had prior contact with the women alleging abuse.

That meant the inquiry was unlawful and “tainted by bias”. The Scottish Government was forced to pay Salmond’s £512,000 legal costs.

A committee of MSPs is now probing both the procedure used to investigate complaints and the government’s actions in the judicial review.

In a statement accompanying the documents, the Scottish Government insists there is nothing to suggest that any individuals “acted in bad faith in relation to the production of information”.

Instead, the legal failure was because the “process of investigation and identification of documents had not been as robust as it should have been.”

READ MORE: Holyrood Alex Salmond inquiry has more questions for SNP's Peter Murrell

The report says the “watershed moment” for the government’s counsel was on December 21, when two papers revealed the “degree and nature of the contact between the IO and the prospective complainers prior to their formal complaints having been made.”

This information was “contained in documents which were identified and produced” for a hearing and which “had not been elicited by previous document searches”.

It says: “While there is no reason to believe that the IO was motivated by anything other than her desire to fulfil her role properly, we recognise that her actions give rise to a perception that there was an unfairness in the operation of the procedure in this case.”

Initially, in mid-November, the Government concluded that it could properly defend the allegation of apparent bias.

However, when more papers were recovered on December, 19 they “appeared to disclose further information about the nature of the contacts between the IO and the complainers” including details of an apparent meeting between them “on the day before the complaint was formalised”.

Meanwhile, the committee has also written to SNP boss Peter Murrell with more questions.

Linda Fabiani has asked the party chief executive – who is the husband of Nicola Sturgeon – for more information about the meeting between the First Minister and her predecessor and aides at her home in Glasgow on April 2, 2018.

In his evidence, Murrell said he did not know about the meeting, but later in the session said he was aware the previous day of Salmond coming to the house.

He also claimed in his written and oral evidence that he was not at home when the meeting took place, but then appeared said he arrived back at the house “not long before the meeting ended”.

Fabiani has now asked for clarity on both points.

There are also questions over the status of the meeting. The First Minister said she believed it was a party issue, that means it does not have to be recorded. But Murrell told MSPs it was Scottish Government business.