LABOUR has dropped an investigation into claims a former Scottish MP sexually assaulted a female councillor after a witness declined to give a statement.

Carol Hughes alleged an ex-parliamentarian caressed her thigh while his wife sat at the same table, but the party said there was “insufficient evidence” to take it further.

She said she was “disappointed” with the male witness and said Labour could have been “more proactive” during the probe.

Hughes was a three-term Labour councillor in South Lanarkshire between 1995 and 2007 and now lives south of the border.

When she was active in the party, she attended Labour events across the country and attended UK and Scottish conferences.

In November, she gave an interview to the Sunday Herald in which she alleged that a former senior party MP, who is Scottish, sexually assaulted her in an Indian restaurant.

“I happened to be sitting next to him," she said, "and then the next thing, his hand was right inside my dress and up my thigh. He was caressing my thigh.”

Hughes said she confided in a friend about the assault soon after it occurred, but she said of his reaction: “He was appalled at me for sitting and letting somebody do that.”

She added: “People might say ‘why did you sit there and let that happen? Why didn’t you do anything in that situation?’ I was shocked, I suppose.

“The things that go through your mind. You don’t want to cause a fuss. You don’t want to cause a scene.”

After giving the interview, Hughes made a formal complaint to Labour and it was handled by the party’s UK sexual harassment panel.

The decision, handed down on Friday, stated that there was “insufficient evidence” available to the panel to determine whether the incident occurred: “The panel noted that the complainant had provided details of a witness who declined to provide a witness statement to the panel. The panel agreed that the matter should not be referred to a full hearing of the National Constitutional Committee.”

It added: “The panel wished to make clear that they did not consider this to be a vexatious complaint and were making no judgement about the integrity of the complainant.”

Hughes told this newspaper: “I am disappointed but not surprised. It was always going to be one person’s word against another.

“I am more disappointed by the witness and that he didn’t want to get involved, for whatever reason. I think he probably wants a quiet life”.

Asked about Labour’s handling of the complaint, she said: “On paper it looks like they are addressing the issue and taking it seriously, but I think they could have been more proactive. I had to say ‘have you contacted the witness’, and they said ‘do you want us to?’.”

A Labour spokesperson said: "All cases are handled consistently with our sexual harassment procedures, however in order to protect the privacy of individuals concerned, we are unable to comment on the details of any individual investigation."