The European Council must ensure EU delivers on its promise to whistleblowers

The European Council has a responsibility to protect the positive amendments made to the proposal for a whistleblower protection directive adopted by the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee last month.

December 18, 2018Blog

The current deliberations of the European Council, suggest that the whistleblower protection directive, they are considering, could risk putting European whistleblowers in more peril rather than offering them greater protection.

On 23 April 2018, the European Commission published a draft law to protect whistleblowers across the EU.  A door was flung open that had previously been locked shut. Like our members and associates in the whistleblower protection community, the Whistleblowing International Network (WIN) welcomed the fact that EU was finally moving to provide a solid statutory basis on which member states would have to protect whistleblowers.  But on a second look, it turned out the draft directive made basic but fundamental mistakes.  It is from these errors that we have all been scrambling to recover.

Fortunately, JURI, the legal affairs Committee of the EP, the lead parliamentary committee in charge of responding to the draft rose to the challenge and did a lot to improve and strengthen the whistleblower protection draft.  If all the Committee’s amendments are adopted, the EU will have a strong foundation for protecting whistleblowers and protecting the public interest for years to come.

If all the Committee’s amendments are adopted, the EU will have a strong foundation for protecting whistleblowers and protecting the public interest for years to come.

However, the main mistake, which the EU Council seems set to embrace, is that the draft reinforces employer control over the reporting of wrongdoing.  It does so by making it a requirement for all those in a work-based relationship to report their concern to their employer first.  With a three-month imposed time-lag and a requirement to use the channels employers set up, it is akin to legislating an obstruction of justice.

The vast majority of all whistleblowers stay in-house trying to do their jobs and ensure their organisations fulfil their roles responsibly.  But those who perceive the need to go straight to the authorities should not, under any circumstances, have to guess whether a court would agree they were reasonable thinking that sharing their evidence with alleged wrongdoers would enable cover ups.  This is the exactly the risk that a whistleblower protection law should help alleviate.

The main mistake, which the EU Council seems set to embrace, is that the draft reinforces employer control over the reporting of wrongdoing.

In jurisdictions where the whistleblowing laws are hailed as examples of international good practice, whistleblowers have a choice about where to report. And in Serbia, where active implementation means protections are working better in practice than in most other countries, there is no time lag between reporting internally and going outside.  While reporting to the organisation will remain the default for the vast majority of whistleblowers, and it makes imminent sense for employers to do all they can to encourage their staff to speak up early, it is dangerous to make it a legal obligation.

Making staff use the channels that employers set up is almost worse.  The vast majority of whistleblowers raise concerns as a normal part of doing their jobs and, typically, it is only because of how their employers respond that they realise that something is really wrong.   Formal reporting of wrongdoing will only ever capture the tip of internal communications the directive seeks to protect; the iceberg is through routine reports of discovered problems though the supervisory chain of command and in sensitive assignments such as audits, inspection reports and reports of investigations.  Very few people who report problems are doing so as dissidents.

The EU needs to understand it is essential to protect the choice of channels for disclosing wrongdoing

The EU needs to understand it is essential to protect the choice of channels for disclosing wrongdoing if it means to fulfill the promises it makes in the introduction to the directive. Namely to protect whistleblowers as a means to safeguard freedom of expression no matter which channel they use, and to encourage and facilitate whistleblowing to the media as well.

The EU should do this on the basis that it:

  1. protects freedom of expression;
  2. it is the vital safety net for the public's right to know when organisations are corrupt or failing to take responsibility;
  3. it ensures employers take seriously their responsibility to make it safe and acceptable to report internally; and
  4. there is no evidence that doing so undermines internal channels as the genuine first port of call for individuals

The whistleblower protection community working together through the Whistleblowing International Network (WIN) to advance excellence in whistleblower law and practice around the world urges all policy makers to think long and hard about what whistleblower protection really means for them. WIN’s latest Legal Brief drafted by Tom Devine, Legal Director of GAP sets out the reasons why the EU Council must remedy these structural problems as a matter of urgency.

The question the EU Council members must ask themselves is whether they mean to deliver whistleblower protection that reinforces democratic accountability in Europe?

The question the EU Council members must ask themselves is whether they mean to deliver whistleblower protection that reinforces democratic accountability in Europe?  If the answer is yes, then they must ensure the law allows information on wrongdoing to flow as freely as possible to those who have the power to act – this includes both the employer and the regulatory authorities – and that it reinforces public disclosures as our mutually important fail-safe.

However, if whistleblower protection continues to be misconstrued as a matter of regulating potentially difficult employee/employer relations, the directive will continue its descent into an exercise in information control; mandating who, how and when information is allowed to be released outside of the employment relationship.  It will not only maintain the status quo, it risks dangerously reinforcing it.

Share it

Anna Myers 2014 045 (2)

About the author

Anna Myers is the Executive Director at WIN, a civil society network committed to excellence in whistleblowing law and practice.  Anna is a lawyer with 18 years’ experience advising whistleblowers, governments, and business.  She was advisor to the Council of Europe on the Recommendation on the Protection of Whistleblowers (2014) and drafted the UNODC Resource Guide on Good Practices in the Protection of Reporting Persons (2015).

MORE ARTICLES

EU Whistleblowing Meter Launched to Monitor Transposition of EU Directive on Whistleblowing

By Janina Mackiewicz | June 23, 2020

On World Whistleblowing Day, 23 June, the Whistleblowing International Network along with its many partners and colleagues across Europe are launching the EU Whistleblowing Meter

Coalition to make whistleblowing safe during COVID-19 and beyond

By Janina Mackiewicz | April 6, 2020

We call on all public authorities and institutions to protect those who report or expose harms, abuses and wrongdoings arising from the COVID-19 crisis.

New page for resources

By Janina Mackiewicz | March 23, 2020

We have added a section to the website with different reports and studies concerning whistleblowing as well as the EU directive.

Colorful whistles in a Christmas tree

Santa came early to whistleblowers. Now the work starts.

By Martin Jefflen | December 16, 2019

From 16 December 2019 Member States have two years to implement the Whistleblower Protection Directive into national law. Time to lobby for better laws.

Be prepared for transposition

By Martin Jefflen | July 5, 2019

The official adoption of the whistleblower directive is foreseen for the autumn. The directive protects persons who report in a work-related context inboth the private and public sector.

What now for the new Whistleblower Protection Directive?

By Martin Todd | April 18, 2019

On Tuesday it was all about the euphoria of the whistleblower protection Directive being adopted by the European Parliament (EP) in Strasbourg. Now the hard work begins again, as politicians, trade unions, NGOs and whistleblowers meet to discuss; “The future of the new [whistleblower protection] Directive”, at a civil society event at the European Parliament, on the 17th of April.

The future of the new whistleblower directive

By Janina Mackiewicz | April 15, 2019

In the final session before the EU elections, the European Parliament will vote for a new EU Directive to protect whistleblowers in Europe. Civil society played an essential role in making this happen.

JURI unanimously accepts trilogue’s whistleblower protection deal

By Martin Todd | March 18, 2019

Warm applause greeted the unanimous adoption of last week’s trilogue provisional agreement on whistleblower protection, at today’s European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee.

Whistleblower Protection platform largely welcomes EU agreement

By Martin Todd | March 13, 2019

Members of the WhistleblowersProtection.EU platform mainly welcomed the provisional agreement reached by the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council, in the early hours of the 12th of March.

EU whistleblower directive must give whistleblowers all reporting options

By Nadja Salson | March 7, 2019

The European Union is expected to shortly adopt the EU’s flagship whistleblower protection directive. EPSU, believes it is essential that the final legislation fully protects whistleblowers and encourages whistleblowers to report wrongdoing, through which ever route they consider most appropriate, be that the media or relevant authorities.