Preventing and dealing with retaliation against whistleblowers

TITLE

THE BASICS OF WHISTLEBLOWING

SUBTITLE

PREVENTING AND DEALING WITH RETALIATION AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWERS

academic writers in Nigeria

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: WHISTLEBLOWER LEGISLATIONS—————————-3

1.0     Introduction——————————————————————3

1.1.1. Whistleblowing based on the case of Edward Snowden)————–4

•        Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) ——————————————–4

•        Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) —————————————5

•        Martin Luther (1483-1546) ———————————————–6

Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968) ———————————————6

1.1.2. Difference between whistleblowing and grievance ——————–7

1.1.3. What is a protected disclosure? ——————————————8

1.1.4. Characteristics of whistleblower —————————————–8

1.1.5. Situational Factors  ———————————————————-8

1.1.6. Role Responsibility of a Whistleblower ———————————8

1.2.0. Forms of whistleblowing  ———————————————–10

1.2.2. What are the standards for whistleblowing policies? —————-11

1.2.3. Confidentiality and Whistleblowing ———————————–12

1.2.4. The 3-tier model  ———————————————————13

1.3.0. UK: Public Interest Disclosure Act 1988 (PIDA) and Public Concern at Work (PCAW) definitions of whistleblowing  —————————–14

•        In the public interest ——————————————————14

•        Reasonable belief  ———————————————————18

1.3.1. Shortfall of PIDA and PCAW in relation to COVID-19 ————19

1.3.2. US: The False Claim Act (FCA), Whistleblowing Protection Act (WPA), Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) definition on whistleblowing ——————————————————————–21

1.3.3. Shortfall of the mentioned legislations (FCA, WPA, SOX, Dodd-Frank) in relation to COVID-19 ————————————————-21

1.3.4. Impact of new legislation (CORE and CARE) ———————–25

1.3.5. EU Whistleblowing Directive definition ——————————-28

1.3.6. What are the gaps in the legislations between EU Member States?  29

THE NETHERLANDS ———————————————————–29

ROMANIA ————————————————————————29

FRANCE —————————————————————————29

BELGIUM  ————————————————————————-36

GERMANY ————————————————————————37

1.3.7. Shortfall of the EU Directive in relation to COVID-19 ————–39

1.4.0. The global approach to whistleblowing in relation to COVID-19 –42

Comparison of whistleblowing policies in the three subjected jurisdictions in relation to COVID-19 ———————————————————-47

THE U.S., EU & UK

1.4.2. The role of trade union in promoting whistleblowing —————–58

1.4.3. Conclusion  —————————————————————-59

Bibliography ———————————————————————   60

CHAPTER 1: WHISTLEBLOWER LEGISLATIONS

  1. Introduction

In the last two decades, public law jurisdictions around the world have either enacted or shown commitment towards implementing legislations that protect public interest whistleblowers. Studies in the United Kingdom, USA and EU Member countries show that whistleblower protection legislation exists in the areas of consumer law, corporate law, financial regulation, and workplace relations law[1].

Generally, the general approach to enacting and enforcing whistleblower protection laws vary significantly in different countries. In France, for instance, there is very little specific statutory protection for whistleblowers although the French National Commission for Data Protection and Liberties—translated as Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL)—has the authority and legal responsibility to protect anyone who makes disclosures under whistleblowing procedures outline by employers. However, some jurisdictions like the United Kingdom have a unified approach to whistleblower protection. Britain, for example, operates a single whistleblowing legislation, PIDA, which provides protection for private and public sector whistleblowers, as well as processes complaints covering a broad range of misconduct. In contrast, whistleblower protection laws in other jurisdictions such as the US are found in various sources, including: (a) federal and state law and (b) statutory and common law[2].

Studies show the level of protection offered to whistleblowers in the United States also depends on the type of employer, misconduct, and the employee who blows the whistle. This section of the research provides an analysis of whistleblower legislations in the aforementioned countries in order to identify several emerging issues for consideration. The purpose is to find a robust case for greater consistency in legal thresholds and operational requirements imposed by the PIDA, Dodd-Frank, EU Directive, among others as Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX), False Claims Act and Corporate Sentencing Guidelines (CSG).


[1] Abazi V., “Whistleblowing in Europe: A New Era at Legal Protection” in Czech P, Heschl A., Lukas K, Nowak M. & Oberleitner G. (eds), European Yearbook on Human Rights (Cambridge: Intersentia,), 94, 01-141

[2] European Commission, Press Release (2018), “Whistleblower Protection: Commission sets new EU-wide rules,” https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=54254