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.