THE Holyrood inquiry probing the Scottish Government’s botched handling of harassment complaints made against Alex Salmond has warned the former First Minister that they won’t be able to “accommodate” him after February 2.

They have asked him to come in either next week or the week after.

The committee is investigating the Scottish Government’s handling of allegations of misconduct made against the former First Minister.

Salmond had the exercise set aside in January 2019, after a judicial review declared it “unlawful” and “tainted by bias”.

He was awarded costs of £512,000, which came from taxpayers’ money.

At a later criminal case the former SNP leader was found not guilty on 12 charges of sexual assault charges.

Last week Salmond rejected an invitation to appear before the committee yesterday, with his lawyer raising concerns about health and safety, pointing to guidance from Holyrood

Presiding Officer Ken Macintosh that says committee hearings should be held remotely.

He also had concerns over key information from the two court cases that the committee has not yet been able to secure. Salmond’s lawyer says this is vital for him to tell the whole truth to the committee.

The Crown Office has already warned him he could be charged for referencing evidence submitted for his criminal trial.

READ MORE: Sturgeon-Salmond saga having no real effect on voters, pollster says

Instead, Salmond suggested he appear before the committee on February 16, urging the MSPs to use the next month to seek the material.

However, in a letter sent to the former SNP leader yesterday, Fabiani said that MSPs had “unanimously” agreed to invite him to give evidence on February 2.

In her letter, Fabiani said:“Should there be pressing reasons why this date is not possible, the committee can offer Tuesday, January 26 as an alternative. However, the committee’s timetable cannot accommodate an evidence session at any date beyond February 2.”

She added: “I am well aware of the tightening of restrictions and of the guidance from the Presiding Officer to which you refer. I have discretion as convener to decide whether a committee meeting is essential business which cannot effectively be carried out through a virtual meeting.

“I also have to consider whether meeting in person is compatible with legal requirements and on this the committee is following all advice from parliamentary officials.

She continued: “The committee’s first preference is for you to appear in person and the clerks will be happy to discuss with you the arrangements in place to do this in line with current guidance.

“However the committee is also content for you to appear via remote video link, with the committee members meeting in person and, should you prefer this option, our broadcasting team will work closely with you to ensure that the connection is as robust as possible.”

She has asked Salmond for a response by tomorrow.

A source close to Salmond said: “What Alex is looking for is to furnish the committee with the information it has asked for and thus the ability tell the whole truth in his evidence without being threatened by Crown Office officials, who are determined to keep these same documents secret.

“Let us hope the Lord Advocate responds positively to the committee’s request and orders his department to pay some proper respect to a parliamentary inquiry”.

The committee has also asked Peter Murrell – who is Nicola Sturgeon’s husband as well as being the chief executive of the SNP – to come before them for a second time on either January 26 or February 2.

He was criticised over his first appearance, MSPs have previously written to him seeking clarification on evidence submitted about meetings between Salmond and Sturgeon and over his use of WhatsApp.

Despite providing clarification in writing last week, committee convener Linda Fabiani said MSPs had more questions.