Not a reason for resignation at present

Sigríður J. Friðjónsdóttir State Prosecutor yesterday instructed the Chief of Police in the South of Iceland an investigation into violations of the Database after doubting her ability to discuss the case.

These are data that Jón Óttar Ólafsson and Guðmundur Haukur Gunnarsson, formerly the employees of a special prosecutor, took free hand and used, among other things, to sell the services of their consulting firm PPP, as was informed of RÚV.

They were charged with violating the duty of confidentiality in the office in 2012 weighing on suspicion of theft of Milestone data, but the State Prosecutor canceled that investigation and did not respond to other suggestions and complaints of unlawful listening in the office.

Furthermore, the Police Supervisory Committee has announced an investigation and the Parliamentary Constitutional and Supervisory Committee will also discuss the matter. Olaf says he wants to wait and see what comes out of it.

« This is my position as it is today, there is a response to this news release and investigation. Then there is some conclusion. »

Extensive access PPP

Ólafur then says Jón Óttar and Guðmundur have had extensive access to data when they worked for the office of a special prosecutor, as they have been involved in listening. Whether they have had access to all the sources of the office, Olaf cannot say.

It has been stated that there was a general suspicion among former superiors and colleagues that the bisexuals had bothered far more data than they were accused.

It has been stated that among the data are recordings and recipes of the phone calls, which in some cases dealt with personal and sensitive cases that were not in any way related to the investigation of the case with a special prosecutor. Data that was obliged to delete.

Asked if he was worried about, when an investigation began on the data theft in 2012, that the office had in his possession data far in excess of sources, Olaf replies no.

« The investigation of these cases related to these recordings was not completed. »

Failure in some cases

But was it not clear in the recordings that these were conversations of the nature that they had no weight for the study?

« If you read the legal provision as it stands today, all recordings should be stored until the matter is over. »

Asked if it also had the recordings that have no weight for investigation, he says it will probably be examined now.

He states that it is clear to delete calls with defendants and attempts have been made to take care of it. However, in some cases it has been failing.

Then it has been a long time since all these recordings in question have been deleted.

Ólafur says the matter is primarily about the fact that people intended to break and do something they should not do, rather than failure in the office’s practices.

« It is being taken and copying data that people should not take and copy and take out of the house. These are data that was clear that people could not copy at all in this way that is done there and carry with them. »