The fate of a 'McMafia' investigation into Trump's Scottish golf course rests on the decision of a judge that could come at any time

• Campaigners want Scotland a probe into how Donald Trump paid for a luxury golf resort in Scotland.
• Scotland says ministers aren't responsible for deciding whether to launch a probe - campaigners disagree.

A judge deciding the fate of a potential investigation into how Donald Trump came to purchase a luxury golf course in Scotland using $60 million in cash under circumstances that campaigners have described as suspicious.

The campaign group Avaaz has asked Scottish authorities to investigate Trump's $60 million purchase of Turnberry using a so-called "unexplained wealth order," (UWO) saying there was a "towering cloud of suspicion" over the transaction.

When the government demurred, Avaaz launched a legal case that was heard this week at the Court of Session in Edinburgh by Craig Sandison, a senior Scottish judge.

There is no specific deadline for Sandison's decision.

UWOs allow UK authorities to investigate any foreign figures who they believe may have laundered money through the UK.

Avaaz believes that Trump's purchase of Turnberry in 2014 is suspicious because he had much of spent his career funding his expansive property with the use of huge loans, before paying $60 million in cash for Turnberry.

James Dodson, a golf journalist, previously said that Eric Trump, a director of Turnberry, told him in 2014 that the Trump Organization had "all the funding we need out of Russia," a claim Eric has dismissed as "completely fabricated."

Scotland's government has rejected calls for an investigation, insisting it does not have the power to initiate such probes in the first place, prompting the suit by Avaaz.

A representative for Avaaz told Insider that ruling's like Sandison's typically take three months to arrive.

Although there is no time limit, the group hopes for a resolution by Christmas.

The hearing is significant because its outcome could play a large part in deciding whether Scotland's government chooses to pursue an investigation against Trump.

The government has so far shown little interest in doing so and argued that only the Lord Advocate, Scotland's most senior law officer and its chief legal adviser - who is politically independent - can initiate one.

But Aidan O'Neill, the lawyer for Avaaz, this week argued that Scottish ministers unlawfully ducked the decision, arguing that the law obliges Scottish ministers to seek appropriate UWOs.

Scottish Ministers don't deny their power to initiate a UWO, but argue the Lord Advocate - Scotland's most senior law officer - would initiate the investigation on their behalf. The Scottish government has neither confirmed nor denied that it is seeking a UWO, or whether it has even been considered.

Avaaz disputes that interpretation, arguing instead that Scottish ministers have a collective responsibility to initiate UWOs and that a provision of a separate role for the Lord Advocate in the operation of UWOs means they cannot be solely responsible for deciding on whether to initiate them.

The Lord Advocate is technically a minister but acts independently, unlike others.

Avaaz also argued that it was unlawful for Scotland's government to decline to state publicly whether it wanted to pursue an investigation, a position it has left ambiguous so far.

Crawford also said that there was "nothing impermissible" about ministers "keeping schtum" about their position on pursuing an order, The Scotsman reported.