EU Considerations on New Protection of Whistleblowers

Authors

  • Jorgete Vitorino Clarindo dos Santos Infineon Technologies AG

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22364/jull.15.17

Keywords:

compliance, whistleblowing channel, protection, Whistleblower Directive, European Union

Abstract

Without some of the important information brought into light by whistleblowers, many current scandals would not have occurred. If whistleblowing is brought into the public domain, it can introduce a previously unforeseen and incorrigible milestone in the biography of whistleblowers, leading to financial loss, loss of work, impact on private life, and even health. Even in situations where the whistleblower acts in good faith, he or she runs the risk of being publicly judged and having the personal reputation tarnished by lack of protection. The persons who have reported wrongdoing may even be driven to complete isolation or pay with their lives or those of their families. In view of this, the European Union has foreseen a better protection for whistleblowers in a new directive, which is to be implemented through a trilateral whistleblower system.

The main new feature of the European Whistleblower Protection Directive is the obligation to establish internal whistleblower channels for legal entities in the public and private sectors with at least 50 or more employees. In the public sector, Member States may exempt cities with fewer than 10 000 inhabitants or fewer than 50 employees working in the public body from the obligation to establish whistleblowing channels. If the report to the company or public body is not successful, the whistleblower may report to the press.

European legislators had until December 2021 to transpose the provisions of this directive into national whistleblower protection regulations. To date, not all States have accomplished this task.

Author Biography

  • Jorgete Vitorino Clarindo dos Santos, Infineon Technologies AG

    Dr., LL.M.
    Director of Compliance at Infineon Technologies AG, Munich

References

Altenbach, T., Dierkes, K. EU-Whistleblowing-Richtlinie und DSGVO [EU Whistleblowing Directive and GDPR]. CCZ, 2020.

Bachmann, G., Kremer, T. Deutscher Corporate Governance Kodex (DCGK) [German Corporate Governance Code (DCGK)]. 8th ed., 2021.

Basar, E., Hiéramente, M. Datenbeschlagnahme in Wirtschaftsstrafverfahren und die Frage der Datenlöschung [Data confiscation in economic criminal proceedings and the question of data deletion]. NStZ, 2018.

Bittmann, F., Brockhaus, M., Von Coelln, S., Heuking, C. Regelungsbedürftige Materien in einem zukünftigen „Gesetz über interne Ermittlungen“ [Matters requiring regulation in a future “Law on Internal Investigations”], NZWiSt, 2019.

Deiseroth, D., Derleder, P. Whistleblower und Denunziatoren [Whistleblowers and Denunciators]. ZRP, 2008.

Dilling, J. Der Schutz von Hinweisgebern und betroffenen Personen nach der EU-Whistleblower-Richtlinie [The protection of whistleblowers and data subjects under the EU Whistleblower Directive]. CCZ, 2019.

Dzida, B., Granetzny, T. Die neue EU-Whistleblowing-Richtlinie und ihre Auswirkungen auf Unternehmen [The new EU Whistleblowing Directive and its impact on companies]. NZA, 35(18), 2021.

Dzida, B. Neue datenschutzrechtliche Herausforderungen für das Personalmanagement [New data protection challenges for HR management]. BB, 2019.

Garden, F., Hiéramente, M. Die neue Whistleblowing-Richtlinie der EU – Handlungsbedarf für Unternehmen und Gesetzgeber [The new Whistleblowing Directive of the EU – need for action for companies and legislators]. BB, 2019.

Granetzny, T., Krause, M. Was kostet ein gutes Gewissen? – Förderung von Whistleblowing durch Prämien nach US-Vorbild? [How much does a clear conscience cost? – Promotion of whistleblowing through US-style bonuses?]. CCZ, 2020.

Hommel, U. Die Zusammenarbeit mit Whistleblowern – Anmerkungen zu der EU-Whistleblower-Richtlinie [Working with Whistleblowers – Comments on the EU Whistleblower Directive]. CCZ, 2021.

Kremer, T. Compliance-Programm in Industriekonzernen [Compliance programme in industrial groups]. ZGR, 2010.

Mahnhold, T. „Global Whistle“ oder „deutsche Pfeife“ – Whistleblower-Systeme im Jurisdiktionskonflikt [“Global whistle” or “German whistle” – whistleblower systems in jurisdictional conflicts]. NZA, 2008.

Peters, A.-K. Anwesenheitsrechte bei der Durchsicht gem. § 110 StPO: Bekämpfung der Risiken und Nebenwirkungen einer übermächtigen Ermittlungsmaßnahme [Rights to be present during the review according to § 110 StPO: Combating the risks and side effects of an overpowering investigative measure]. NZWiST, 2017.

Schmolke, U. Die neue Whistleblower-Richtlinie ist da! Und nun? Zur Umsetzung der EU-Richtlinie zum Schutz von Hinweisgeber in das deutsche Recht [The new whistleblower policy is here! And now? Implementing the EU directive on the protection of whistleblowers into German law]. NZG, 2020.

Tido, P. Durchsuchung und Beschlagnahme [Search and seizure]. C. H. Beck, München, 4. Aufl. 2018.

Vitorino Clarindo dos Santos, J. Rechtsfragen der Compliance in der Internationalen Unternehmensgruppe [Legal issues of compliance in the international group of companies]. Lohmar, 2013.

Vitorino Clarindo dos Santos, J. Internal investigations. ICRio, 2020. Available: https://youtu.be/ j8fAUKlizhU [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Wiedmann, M., Seyfert, S. Richtlinienentwurf der EU-Kommission zum Whistleblowing [Draft directive of the EU Commission on whistleblowing]. CCZ, 2019.

Xylander, K.-J., Kiefner, A., Bahlinger, S. Durchsuchung und Beschlagnahme in der Sphäre des Unternehmens Anwalts im Zuge von internen Ermittlungen [Search and seizure in the sphere of the company law in the course of internal investigations]. BB, 2018.

Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the Protection of Persons Who Report Breaches of Union Law. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32019L1937&from=pt [last viewed 03.02.2022].

BVerfG (3. Kammer des Zweiten Senats) – Beschluss vom 27.6.2018 - 2 BvR 1405/17, 2 BvR 1780/17.

BVerfG NJW 2018, p. 2385.

EGMR, de 21.07.2011 – 28274/08.

LAG Baden-Württemberg de 20.12.2018 – 17 Sa 11/18, NZA-RR 2019, p. 242 = NZA 2019, p. 711 Ls.

LG Bochum NStZ 2016, p. 50.

LG Hamburg NJW 2011, p. 942 (HSH Nordbank).

LAG Stuttgart 20.12.2018 – 17 Sa 11/18. Available: http://lrbw.juris.de/cgi-bin/laender_rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bw&nr=27411 [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Arte. Der Gefährlichste Mann in Amerika. Daniel Ellsberg und die Pentagon-Papiere [The Most Dangerous Man in America. Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers]. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGYLxyLh8d8 [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Chelsea Manning aus Haft entlassen [Chelsea Manning released from prison]. Available: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/whistleblowerin-chelsea-manning-aus-haft-entlassen-15020248.html [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Fernandes, M., McGuinn, J., Rossi, L. Estimating the economic benefits of whistleblower protection in public procurement. Milieu Ltd., 2017. Available: https://op.europa.eu/pt/search-results?p_p_id=eu_europa_publications_portlet_search_executor_SearchExecutorPortlet_INSTANCE_q8EzsBteHybf&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state=normal&queryText=Estimating+the+economic+benefits+of+whistleblower+protection+in+public+procurement+:+final+report.&facet.collection=EULex,EUPub,EUDir,EUWebPage,EUSummariesOfLegislation&startRow=1&resultsPerPage=10&SEARCH_TYPE=SIMPLE [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Herbst, M. Ehemals Tierärztin im Schlachthof Bad Braustet [Former veterinarian at the Bad Braustet slaughterhouse]. Available: https://www.anstageslicht.de/menschen-dahinter/dr-margrit-herbst/ [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Resolution 2300, Improving the protection of whistleblowers all over Europe. 2019. Available: http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=28150 [last viewed 03.02.2022].

spiegel.de. US-Bundesgericht: Von Snowden enthülltes Überwachungsprogramm war illegal [US Federal Court: Surveillance program revealed by Snowden was illegal]. Available: https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/edward-snowden-enthuelltes-ueberwachungsprogramm-war-illegal-a-1e08c392-aec9-4149-94f1-cd8a6ad535fb [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Süddeutsche-Zeitung. „Nicht-Zuständig“: Zeuge kritisiert Behörden [“Not responsible”: Witness criticizes authorities]. Available: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/ekelfleisch-prozess-nicht-zustaendig-zeuge-kritisiert-behoerden-1.1099136 [last viewed 03.02.2022].

tagesschau.de. Ausbreitung des Corona-Virus: Kritik an chinesischen Behörden [Spread of the corona virus: Criticism of the Chinese authorities]. Available: https://www.tagesschau.de/thema/coronavirus/ [last viewed 20.05.2021].

U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division. Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs. 2020. Available: https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/page/file/937501/download [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Whistleblowing Report 2019. Available: https://whistleblowingreport.eqs.com [last viewed 03.02.2022].

Downloads

Published

2022-11-16

How to Cite

Vitorino Clarindo dos Santos, J. (2022). EU Considerations on New Protection of Whistleblowers. Journal of the University of Latvia. Law, 15, 243-265. https://doi.org/10.22364/jull.15.17