Inquiry into wrongful prosecution of Rangers administrators

Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC

A judge-led inquiry is to be held into why two men were wrongfully prosecuted during a fraud probe relating to the sale of Rangers.

Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC said he supported an independent probe into the failed case against financial experts David Whitehouse and Paul Clark.

But Mr Wolffe said the inquiry had to wait until all related legal proceedings had concluded.

The Lord Advocate said a judge from outside of Scotland might be required.

Mr Whitehouse and Mr Clark were appointed administrators when the company that ran Rangers went into administration in 2012.

They were arrested in 2014 but all charges were later dropped.

The Crown has since said their prosecution was "malicious" and both men were awarded £10.5m each in damages.

• Lord Advocate says sorry to former Rangers administrators

• £24m bill for ex-Rangers administrators' legal claim

• 'No criminal conduct' in Rangers probe, says Crown Office

Speaking in a debate at Holyrood, Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser speculated, with other cases pending, that the total cost to the taxpayer could reach £100m.

He said: "We are still no closer to an explanation on how and why these individuals were victims of a malicious prosecution.

"The issue we have to understand is how this could possibly happen.

"What was the motivation of the Crown Office in pursuing them, given the lack of evidence of any crime being committed? What was the role of the then lord advocate Frank Mulholland, now a High Court judge?"

David Whitehouse (left) and Paul Clark (right) were awarded damages after being wrongfully prosecuted

MSPs voted in favour of an independent inquiry but they also accepted a Labour amendment that Police Scotland's role in the saga should be part of any future probe.

In a separate legal claim, Mr Whitehouse and Mr Clark previously settled with Police Scotland over their wrongful arrest.

'Transparent and independent'

Mr Wolffe - who was not the lord advocate at the time of the initial prosecutions - said he agreed there "should be a process of inquiry, that that inquiry should be transparent and independent and that it should be led by a judge".

He added: "I entirely agree the judge appointed would have to be demonstrably independent... and it may well be appropriate to appoint a judge from outwith Scotland.

"However it would be premature at this time to conclude that when the time comes to establish the inquiry there is no Scottish judge that can satisfy that requirement."