The Henrik Sass Larsen case – law and politics in the Ombudsman world the provisions of the Public Administration Act and the Penal Code, breach of such an order is punishable by imprisonment. Sass Larsen was therefore unable to inform the public exactly why he was (currently) not available as a ministerial candidate. The question may be asked why the authorities wished to impose this order to remain silent on Sass Larsen. This was clarified during the Ombudsman investigation of the case. Thus the Ministry of Justice stated among other things that there had been no obligation to show the PET memorandum to Sass Larsen. The Ministry also stated that there was a ‘clear need to impose an order to remain silent on Henrik Sass Larsen due to the harm that might be caused in relation to the prevention etc. of criminal offences if an unauthorised person became aware of the confidential information’. It is not difficult to understand why Henrik Sass Larsen wanted an investigation of the order to remain silent. He was under great pressure to explain the detailed background to his not being available for a ministerial post but unable to do so while the order remained in force. Of course this could – and indeed did – give rise to much speculation about exactly what biker gang links etc. had temporarily made him unavailable for a ministerial career. No written documentation An important issue for the Ombudsman was therefore whether the order to remain silent was valid. This issue could be divided into two sub-issues: Had the conditions of the law for imposing an order to remain silent been met? And could the way in which it was imposed be problematic? The question whether the conditions of the law for imposing an order to remain silent had been met was difficult. However, the Ombudsman did not have a fully sufficient basis for rejecting the authorities’ assessment, including their assessment that there was a clear need to impose the order – as required by the rules. However, the case raised other issues, i.e. the fact that the order to remain silent had only been imposed verbally on Sass Larsen and the lack of any notes or other documentation of its existence, content or scope. The Public Administration Act and the Penal Code contain no provisions specifying the form in which an order to remain silent must be imposed in 53