At the same time, 13 disciplinary proceedings were initiated against seven prosecutors, which were submitted for examination to the Disciplinary Board of the Superior Council of Prosecutors. Regarding public policies in the field of respect for private and family life, the People's Advocate identified a problem that could generate the violation of this right, following the amendments made on 19.07.2018 by Law no.14339, adopted in the context of the application of the Law on data exchange and interoperability. By Law no. 143 the paragraph (5) of Art. 5 of Law no. 133 on personal data was completed with letter g), which establishes that the consent of the subject of personal data is not required in cases where the processing is necessary for the exchange of data under the legislation in force on data exchange and interoperability. Respectively, starting with the date of entry into force of this law (10.11.2018) all public institutions and authorities are obliged to provide access to the registers, databases, information systems and evidence systems they manage, connecting them to the interoperability platform, with the exception of those with responsibilities in the field of supervision of entities in the financial sector, national defense, state security, the maintenance of public order, combating crime, preventing and combating corruption, insofar as the special legislation applies. It should be mentioned that during the procedure for approving the draft law, the National Center for Personal Data Protection did not support the proposals regarding the amendment and completion of Art.5 and Art.15 of the Law on personal data protection, in order to avoid the risk of information leakage, illegal access to personal data, and not to make assumptions to the data subject about the existence of an uncontrolled access to personal data concerning him/her. The People's Advocate proposed the initiation of the procedure for amending Law no. 133 of 08.07.2011 on personal data protection in order to exclude the provisions that may generate the violation of the right to intimate, private and family life. The State Chancellery supported40 the proposal submitted by the People's Advocate, but so far no draft amendment to the provisions in question has been drawn up. The jurisprudence of the ECHR has examined numerous situations in which data protection issues have been addressed, in particular situations concerning the interception of communications41, various forms of surveillance42 and protection against the storage of personal 39 Law no. 143 of 19.07.2018 for the amendment and completion of some legislative acts, Art.IX; Letter of the State Chancellery no. 31-16-6075 of 13 09.2019; 41 See, for example, ECHR Judgment of 2 August 1984 in the case of Malone v. The United Kingdom, no. 8691/79; The ECHR judgment of 3 April 2007 in the case of Copland v. The United Kingdom, no. 62617/00; 40 27