The most remarkable thing in this case, to me, is the extent to which the press colluded with the intelligence officials. The press is supposed to check and balance, but in this case they walked hand-in-hand with the agencies. The article seems to conclude that the officials are being punished for talking to the press - well yes, they worked with the press to suppress the story, and successfully.

The whistleblower's revelations, obviously very serious and substantiated, have effectively been buried. No one in Denmark knows what this case is about, except that these top officials are being prosecuted for vague reasons, and with an undertone that it is all very unfair and probably a bad thing for Denmark.

Frankly, this BBC article probably contains more information than you would have from following the case in Danish media over a couple of years. (edit: Guardian, thanks for the correction)

I'm finding this difficult to follow. As far as I can tell:

1) Denmark partners with NSA for wiretap (presumably while Findsen/Frederiksen are head(s) of the respective agency)

2) Whistleblower thinks agency is overstepping its legal bounds in wiretap collection, files complaint and begins internal investigation

3) Agency dismisses results of internal investigation, tells whistleblower to drop it. Whistleblower subsequently goes to independent/external oversight body for investigation.

4) External oversight body publishes conclusion that agency illegally surveilled the entire country.

5) Findsen/Frederiksen arrested for allegedly disclosing details of the wiretap deal to various people (journalists/family/friends).

I don't get it. What's the connection between the whistleblower and the "leaks"? Does the government need a sacrificial lamb for the illegal surveillance but they can't prosecute Findsen for that, so they're coming up with some alternate charges to placate the public?

As an aside, I have no sympathy for a spy boss whinging that he was under surveillance when (assuming what the whistleblower is saying is true), he was fine with putting everybody in the whole country through practically the same thing.

This article is severely dated. On 27th October the Supreme Court decided that the cases would only be partially closed to the public and that the accused would have full access to the charges and supporting material. The Prosecution Service asserted that this would expose highly sensitive material to unacceptable risk of unauthorized disclosure and dropped the cases.

The only way this would make sense is if there’s more to it than what Snowden has revealed. A minister involuntarily confirming something that already leaked is grounds for a stern telling off in private by the Prime minister, but not this.

I would make sense for an internal party (the anonymous whistleblower) read Snowden’s revelations, understood thank to internal knowledge that there didn’t make sense or revealed something else, and decided to investigate. I’ve seen that myself a couple of times: shocking revelations about a company I work at that don’t add up, unless there’s more to it.

If Findsen or Frederiksen had mentioned any of that, or even alluded to, typically “Oh, the reality is so much worse than that, if only they knew” or (more likely) “They are making a big fuss about normal proceedings; if they knew what’s really happening, they would be so much more upset.” then the accusations (and disagreement) would make sense: they think neither of those statement reveal much and claim their innocence, but someone inclined to attack the program would (paradoxically) want to use that revelation to hurt them.

It is worth noting that it is now confirmed by both Finnsen and Hjort that the case is about the US run, Danish facilitated, signals espionage operation directed primarily towards Sweden and Germany (kabelsamarbejdet).

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but it seems we are experiencing a regression in the democratic rule of law these days, even in countries like Denmark.

A more uptodate article stating that the charges have been dropped:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/04/ex-danish-defe...

undefined

This is an old article, according to Wikipedia the charges have been dropped

Intelligence agencies have become a problem. It seems like they take the most aggressive, most skilled in the art of deception, most power-hungry people that society has to offer, then they give them weapons and full access to all of the country's top tech and information... What could possibly go wrong? Who came up with the idea that these were the right kinds of people we need for such jobs?

Didn't the US employ ex-Nazis in intelligence jobs at some point? It's just insane to think about. These people can't be trusted to not kill innocent people and yet they're trusted with all the tech and the security of an entire nation. It's like employing a serial killer to be your body guard. Makes no sense.

It's not the only (alleged) intelligence operation that targeted Sweden: https://wikispooks.com/wiki/The_secret_war_against_Sweden

> Under the draconian law, those found guilty can be imprisoned for up to 12 years.

While the whole thing might be crazy to be prosecuted in the first place - is 12 years in prison for treason really that draconian?

undefined

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

undefined

So wait, let me get this straight: - a guy with access to highest level state secrets discloses them to his family members and possibly journalists. - he is shocked they investigated, surveiled and prosecuted him for this because of why?

Because, as the head of the intelligence agency he though the laws do not apply to him?

Now, other journalists are trying to write an extremely convoluted article about the subject.

Okay, now can I read the intercept version of this story.

undefined

undefined