The UK’s Supreme Court is being asked to rule on the Scottish government’s refusal to release documents linked to an inquiry that cleared Nicola Sturgeon of breaching the ministerial code.

Ministers have cited legal professional privilege as grounds for refusing a freedom of information (FOI) request from a member of the public.

Benjamin Harrop was seeking internal emails, messages and other communications about whether the government had a legal right to withhold the material.

The Court of Session later overturned a ruling by Information Commissioner David Hamilton that the documents should be released, but Hamilton is now seeking permission to take the case to the UK’s highest court.

Scotland’s FOI law allows some information requests to be refused if they would compromise confidential communications between lawyers and their clients – but it is subject to a public interest test.

Hamilton said he was worried that the Court of Session ruling had wider implications, making it too difficult to obtain legally-privileged documents.

He said: “It is my view that this ruling runs contrary to the parliament’s clear intention behind the FOI Act.”

“There are significant implications and risks placed on the public’s right to access information because of this ruling – it is therefore clearly in the public interest that I seek to challenge this at the Supreme Court”.

A Scottish government spokesperson said: “As this is subject to live litigation in would not be appropriate to comment.”

The row can ultimately be traced back to the bitter dispute between Nicola Sturgeon and the late Alex Salmond over the government’s handling of harassment complaints against him.

Salmond, a former SNP leader and first minister, challenged the way the investigation was conducted, and in 2019 government lawyers conceded the process had been unlawful and procedurally unfair.

The fallout triggered allegations that Sturgeon had breached the ministerial code through her handling of contacts with Salmond and by misleading the Scottish Parliament about what she knew and when.

The government’s independent adviser on the ministerial code, Irish barrister James Hamilton KC, carried out an investigation and concluded in 2021 that Sturgeon had not breached the code.

In a separate criminal case, Salmond was cleared in 2020 of sexually assaulting nine women.

Harrop, who has said he joined the SNP in 2014, has written on the Wings Over Scotland website, external about his efforts to obtain information, claiming the Scottish government has a “pathological aversion to transparency and accountability”.

The particular information request that could potentially trigger a Supreme Court ruling asks for material relating to the internal discussions among ministers, advisers and civil servants about whether they could claim an FOI exemption for material gathered by James Hamilton.

While some information was divulged, the government claimed legal privilege over some of the correspondence, with the Court of Session eventually ruling those did not have to be disclosed.

Scottish Labour’s acting leader Jackie Baillie claimed that too often “the SNP operates under a cloak of secrecy”.

She added: “This legal challenge could have significant implications for the disclosure of information.

“However, it should not take lengthy legal disputes to get answers from the SNP government.

“We need to see an end to the culture of cover-up that the SNP has created and a renewed commitment to openness and integrity in government.”

Before his death from a heart attack in October 2024, Salmond was pursuing a separate civil case against the Scottish government, seeking damages arising from unlawful handling of complaints against him.

A millionaire businessman and former rock musician Paul McManus has since taken over the legal rights of that case and has said he will continue the action.