WIN calls on EU Justice Ministers to support flexible reporting channels in EU Directive

BREAKING NEWS
07/03/2018 – The Executive Director and the Board of Trustees of the Whistleblowing International Network (WIN) have written an urgent open letter to the Ministers of Justice of all 28 EU Member States.

As lawyers and experts with over 40 years’ experience in the field of whistleblowing law and practice, WIN’s Executive Director and its Board know how vital it is for organisational governance and democratic accountability that reports of wrongdoing can be made directly to competent authorities first.

Capture

If the EU adopts a directive that imposes a strict hierarchy of reporting, it will make it more dangerous for individuals to speak up, not less. This will further reinforce a dynamic of silence and resorting to anonymous leaks. Citizens need to feel empowered to challenge wrongdoing and we need organisations that welcome those who alert them to problems and act in best interests of society.  The proposed Directive will have the opposite effect.

As it stands, the EU is on the verge of adopting a whistleblower law that would make it more dangerous for individuals at work to speak up about wrongdoing than it has been so far, making it easier for corruption and abuses of power to remain unseen and unchallenged.

WIN stands resolute in its opposition to a directive that imposes mandatory internal reporting as a minimum standard and urges all those in Europe working to better protect whistleblowers to join them in their call for flexible protected disclosure channels.

Whistleblowers Call on EU to Remove Obligation to Report Internally First

BREAKING NEWS
25/02/2019 – Today, five well-known European whistleblowers wrote directly to EU Vice President Frans Timmerman and Commissioner Věra Jourová calling on them to ensure a new law to protect whistleblowers across all 28 Member States removes any doubt that whistleblowers are protected for going directly to the competent authorities.EU
Last year, Timmermans and Jourová proudly presented the Commission draft stating:

“Many recent scandals may never have come to light if insiders hadn’t had the courage to speak out. But those who did took enormous risks… There should be no punishment for doing the right thing [and] today’s proposals also protect those who act as sources for investigative journalists, helping to ensure that freedom of expression and freedom of the media are defended in Europe.”

The whistleblowers also sent their letter to the European Council representing state parties in the negotiations on a new EU law. The Council’s position not only rejects decades-long, hard won protections for whistleblowers in Europe (see Ireland for instance) but seems determined to turn a law that should be designed to ensure the free flow of information for the responsible exercise of institutional authority, into an information control system to protect the reputation of employers.

Continue reading

The Truth Needs Friends – EU must strengthen whistleblower protection in Europe!

WIN is supporting this campaign by the Green/EFA Group in the EU Parliament because we have a massive opportunity to end the fear, silence, loneliness and bullying that some people suffer from just telling the truth. The European Union is on the verge of enacting new legislation that would change the lives of people who reveal the truth about illegalities, corrupt practices and other dodgy dealings – otherwise known as “whistleblowers”.

The first of its kind, the new European Whistleblower Directive would oblige all EU governments to introduce minimum standards of protection for truth-tellers. These protections would include penalties for people that retaliate against whistleblowers or try to shut them up; an obligation for public and private bodies to set up channels for receiving reports and to keep the identity of the whistleblower confidential; and legal shields for whistleblowers so that, if for example they breach a confidentiality agreement, they would not be held liable for it.

Continue reading

EU could still undermine its own objectives on whistleblower protection

06/02/19 – It is now crunch time as the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Council engage in trilogue negotiations to agree the final text of the EU draft directive on the protection of whistleblowers.

WIN presents, courtesy of Tom Devine, Legal Director of the Government Accountability Project, an analysis of the European Council’s agreed position published on the 29th January 2019. This is what the Council is taking into the negotiations and it is much further away from the European Parliament’s position on the fundamental issue of protecting those who report information directly to competent authorities than we had hoped or can understand.

This Legal Brief explains exactly what the problems are and why enforcing mandatory internal reporting is as bad for business as it is for individuals who want to speak up about wrongdoing, even directly to their employers!

Not only does the European Council retain and reinforce the structural problems of mandatory internal reporting  – originally included by the Commission but removed by Parliament in its proposal! – it has added its own poison pills:

  • restoring vulnerability to obstruction of justice by canceling the clear right to make external disclosures to government authorities immediately;
  • adding an unprecedented subjective test as a prerequisite for the liability shield: the whistleblower not only must prove a reasonable belief of misconduct but also that his or her specific whistleblowing was necessary to reveal it;
  • effectively cancelling the liability shield while adding an unprecedented prerequisite for protected speech — that evidence was lawfully obtained, not just lawfully disclosed. Significantly, this will put the whistleblower on trial in every case, having to win that battle before being able to challenge any retaliation against them for having reported the actual wrongdoing; and
  • finally, by imposing a subjective, unreviewable, open-ended national security loophole giving each nation the option to cancel the Directive’s public freedom of expression rights