How to protect whistleblowers?

HCLU and K-monitor provided expert opinion on the government’s draft law on whistleblower protection.

A whistleblower exposes his or her supervisor by disclosing information to prevent damage to society or by posterior revealing the circumstances of damage. This is very useful to society but poses great risks to the individual. Therefore, we need to provide sufficient guarantees for the individual and prevent retaliation by supervisors of whistleblowers. The case of the policeman who exposed two officers after they had beaten a defendant to death during an interrogation demonstrates the need for effective regulation. The policeman in question was forced on paid-leave as retaliation.
The government’s proposal to protect whistleblowers is important. Whistleblower protection in other countries is an important institution in the fight against corruption, yet in Hungary it is an almost unknown concept. However, we find the proposed measures unfortunate as they wrongly assume the existence of well-functioning and effective mechanisms for integration in the public sector.
A general problem with the proposal, we find, is the lack of clarity on the involvement of the whistleblower in an investigation and how an investigation might be launched in a case. We believe closer cooperation between the prosecution and the system of whistleblower protection is needed. It is also unclear how the whistleblower will be given legal and financial support. Furthermore, we find it unfortunate that outside the public sector the protection of whistleblowers is incidental.
Anonymity and protection of personal data is critical to regulation on whistleblower protection from the perspective of fundamental rights, efficiency and trust. The advisor on integration plays a critical role in the process but the adviser’s independence is not guaranteed in the draft law which is paramount. We highlight the opportunities for abuse embedded in the electronic reporting system and the need to strengthen the role of the ombudsman. Outside the public sector, whistleblowers have the possibility to hire a lawyer whose role is analogous to that of an adviser.  However, the emphasis here is on “possibility” as there is no way to force companies to adopt the system of protection.
Meanwhile, the Council of Europe is drafting a legal opinion on whistleblower protection. It will be worth paying attention to the proposed solutions.

Share

Related articles

Pegasus case: HCLU takes coordinated domestic and foreign legal action

The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (HCLU) is taking legal action on behalf of six of its clients before the Hungarian authorities, the European Commission, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and in Israel. The organisation aims to expose the practice of unlawful secret surveillance, to have international fora declare that the Hungarian regulation of secret information gathering violates fundamental rights and to prevent politically motivated abuses.

Judicial Warrants Are Required for Government Surveillance

The Strasbourg court's decision in a case from Hungary declares once and for all that uncontrolled government surveillance is incompatible with European human rights standards.

Call for urgent amicus briefs!

In April 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) declared invalid the Data Retention Directive that unified the rules of the retention of selective data by Internet and telephone services and determined the accessibility of data by authorities in the member states. Despite the content of the judgment, the Hungarian act allowing data retention is still in force. In October, 2014 the HCLU started litigation against two major service providers in order to force the Hungarian Constitutional Court (CC) to repeal the unlawful act.