BBC Scotland today:

Police Scotland says it is not launching a fresh investigation into claims about a £667,000 fund raised by the SNP for an independence referendum campaign. Independence activist Sean Clerkin reported the party to police, accusing it of “misusing” the cash by spending it on “general” campaigning, the Scottish Sun, external reported.

It came after First Minister John Swinney confirmed the fund had been used for the SNP’s “ongoing activity”, insisting it had been spent on “independence objectives”. Concerns about the money sparked the police investigation that led to former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell – Nicola Sturgeon’s estranged husband – admitting to embezzling more than £400,000 from the party.

In response to Clerkin’s fresh complaint, a spokesperson for Police Scotland said the independence fund had already been investigated as part of the Murrell probe, and that no further action would be taken as it stood. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8n159ej7o

Now, some folk might still believe that someone in the SNP did still misuse the funds but the presumption of innocence applies. If no one has been convicted of criminally misusing the donor funds, then neither any individual nor the Scottish National Party can properly be treated as legally guilty of that allegation.

Imagine you had been accused of a crime but were not prosecuted, even after years of intensive police investigation, you’d be entitled to insist on innocence. That’s the law.

BBC Scotland today, instead, in an extended piece aimed at stewing confusion rather than telling the truth and ending it and allow Stuart Campbell of Wings over Scotland to speculate and then suggest the SNP needs to respond to his speculation. Ridiculous.

Why should deniers be careful now?

In the UK (including Scotland), it is not automatically a criminal offence to accuse the SNP of having misused donor funds. However, such an accusation can have legal consequences, primarily in the law of defamation.

A few distinctions are important:

• Criminal law: Merely making a false accusation about a political party is generally not a criminal offence in itself. There are exceptions involving harassment, malicious communications, or certain election-related offences, but a standalone public allegation is usually a matter of civil, not criminal, law.
• Defamation: If someone publishes a statement that lowers the reputation of another person or a legal entity and cannot establish a defence (such as truth, honest opinion, or publication on a matter of public interest), they may face a defamation claim. Under Scots law, this is governed principally by the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021.
• Can the SNP sue? Political parties can, in principle, bring defamation proceedings if the law recognises them as having a reputation capable of protection. Whether a particular statement is actionable depends on its wording, context, and whether it is presented as fact or opinion.
• Individuals versus organisations: Accusing a named individual within the party of criminal misuse of funds without evidence may expose the speaker to a clearer defamation risk than making a general political criticism of the party’s financial management.

In practical terms, if the allegation that the SNP misused donor funds has not been established and no court has found that it occurred, then stating as a fact that “the SNP misused donor funds” carries a greater legal risk than saying, for example, “There were allegations that were investigated.”

So, while it is not generally a criminal offence simply to make the accusation, asserting as fact that the SNP misused donor funds without being able to substantiate that claim could potentially expose the speaker or publisher to civil liability for defamation. Whether a particular statement would actually be unlawful would depend on its precise wording and the available evidence.