Nearly two years after her arrest, former Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon remains under a cloud of suspicion—not because she has been charged, but because she will not release the written statement she gave to police investigating the Scottish National Party’s finances. Her lawyer’s firm refusal to publish the document has reignited debate about transparency, political accountability, and the limits of legal process in high-profile cases.
At the centre of the controversy is Operation Branchform, the long-running Police Scotland investigation into the SNP's fundraising and spending. In March 2025, police dropped their investigation into Sturgeon herself and asked her to provide a witness statement, effectively exonerating her as a suspect. Yet she declined to give that voluntary statement, and earlier, during a seven-hour police interview in June 2023, she answered “no comment” to every question on legal advice. She later submitted a written response—but it only covered some of the detectives' questions, according to The Telegraph. Now, opposition politicians and media are demanding she publish that document. Her lawyer, Aamer Anwar, says there is “no onus on her to now prove her innocence in the court of media opinion” and that she has been “exonerated through the proper process.”
“Explains the SNP finances scandal and Sturgeon's refusal to release her police statement.”
The background to this standoff involves Peter Murrell, Sturgeon’s estranged husband and the SNP’s former chief executive for more than two decades. In April 2026, Murrell was jailed at the High Court in Edinburgh for five years and three months for embezzling around £400,000 from the SNP. The court heard he used party funds for lavish personal spending. Sturgeon has denied any knowledge of his crimes, and the pair have separated. But the Murrell conviction has intensified pressure on Sturgeon to come clean about what she knew and when.
For UK readers, this story raises questions about the balance between legal rights and public accountability. Under Scottish law, a person who is not charged has no obligation to make their statements public. Yet politicians, especially former leaders, face an unwritten code of transparency. The Scottish Tories’ deputy leader, Rachael Hamilton, said Sturgeon’s refusal to publish “blows apart any pretence that Nicola Sturgeon is prepared to be transparent about this SNP scandal” and “will only fuel suspicion about what she is hiding.” Sturgeon counters that she has “fully co-operated with the police” and that her silence during the interview was standard legal advice. Police Scotland, for its part, dropped its investigation into her, but officers reportedly believe she only co-operated “to a point.”
Q: Why won’t Nicola Sturgeon release her police statement? Her lawyer, Aamer Anwar, says she has been “exonerated” and that there is no obligation for her to prove her innocence publicly. He argues that the legal process—a “robust ‘gold-plated’ financial crime investigation”—has already cleared her.
Q: What did Peter Murrell do, and how is Sturgeon linked to the case? Murrell, Sturgeon’s husband and former SNP chief executive, embezzled around £400,000 from party funds and was jailed for five years and three months in 2026. Sturgeon has said she knew nothing about the theft, and the police investigation into her was dropped. However, critics question how she could have been unaware given their close relationship.
Q: What is Operation Branchform? It is the Police Scotland investigation into the SNP’s finances, launched after complaints about how party donations were spent. Sturgeon was arrested and interviewed in June 2023 but never charged. The probe led to Murrell’s conviction and continues to examine the party’s financial management.
What happens next depends on public and political pressure. With no legal requirement to publish, Sturgeon is unlikely to change her stance unless she chooses to. The Scottish Tories will continue to demand transparency, but without a formal investigation into her, she faces no further legal jeopardy. For now, the document remains private, and the questions linger.
