Whistleblowing
Contributing Editors
In this new age of accountability, organisations around the globe are having to navigate a patchwork of new laws designed to protect those who expose corporate misconduct. IEL’s Guide to Whistleblowing examines what constitutes a protective disclosure, the scope of regulations across 24 countries, and the steps businesses must take to ensure compliance with them.
Learn more about the response taken in specific countries or build your own report to compare approaches taken around the world.
Choose countries
Select specific jurisdictions to filter on
Choose questions
Choose the questions you would like answering, or choose all for the full picture.
02. Which companies must implement a whistleblowing procedure?
03. Is it possible to set up a whistleblowing procedure at a Group level, covering all subsidiaries?
04. Is there a specific sanction if whistleblowing procedures are absent within the Company?
05. Are the employee representative bodies involved in the implementation of this system?
06. What are the publicity measures of the whistleblowing procedure within the company?
07. Should employers manage the reporting channel itself or can it be outsourced?
08. What are the obligations of the employer regarding the protection of data collected related to the whistleblowing procedure?
09. What precautions should be taken when setting up a whistleblowing procedure?
12. What is the legal definition of a whistleblower?
13. Who can be a whistleblower?
14. Are there requirements to fulfil to be considered as a whistleblower?
15. Are anonymous alerts admissible?
16. Does the whistleblower have to be a direct witness of the violation that they are whistleblowing on?
17. What are the terms and conditions of the whistleblowing procedure?
18. Is there a hierarchy between the different reporting channels?
- (-)
19. Should the employer inform external authorities about the whistleblowing? If so, in what circumstances?
20. Can the whistleblower be sanctioned if the facts, once verified, are not confirmed or are not constitutive of an infringement?
21. What are the sanctions if there is obstruction of the whistleblower?
22. What procedure must the whistleblower follow to receive protection?
23. What is the scope of the protection?
24. What are the support measures attached to the status of whistleblower?
25. What are the risks for the whistleblower if there is abusive reporting or non-compliance with the procedure?
19. Should the employer inform external authorities about the whistleblowing? If so, in what circumstances?
19. Should the employer inform external authorities about the whistleblowing? If so, in what circumstances?
Flag / Icon
Germany
Germany
- at Oppenhoff
- at Oppenhoff
Once the reporting process at the internal reporting office is completed, the internal reporting office can take various follow-up actions. In addition to internal investigations, the process can also be handed over to a competent authority for further investigation (section 18 No. 4 HinSchG).
Flag / Icon
Ireland
Ireland
- at Arthur Cox
- at Arthur Cox
Section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 2011 establishes that a person/corporate entity will be guilty of an offence:
- if they have information; and
- they know or believe that information will or might be of material assistance in preventing the commission of a relevant offence or securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any other person for a relevant offence; and
- they fail without a reasonable excuse to disclose that information as soon as it is practicable to do so to An Garda Síochána (the Irish police force).
The “relevant offences” are set out in the schedule to the 2011 Act and are wide-ranging. These are arrestable offences and include: breaches of company law, competition law, banking, investment funds and other financial activities, theft and fraud, bribery and corruption, criminal damage to property and consumer protection. The range of offences covered can be amended by ministerial order.
The obligation to make a notification under section 19 applies to any person, including corporate entities as well as natural persons. If an offence is committed by a corporate entity and it can be proven that this was done with the consent or connivance of any officer (such a director) or was as a result of the officers wilful neglect, that person will also be guilty of an offence and will be prosecuted and penalised as if they had committed the offence themselves.
The maximum penalty for failing to report an offence is an unlimited fine and imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both.
A person is under a mandatory statutory obligation to make a report under the 2011 Act as soon as it is practicable to do so.
Persons/corporate entities will be guilty of an offence under the 2011 Act if they fail to report a relevant offence without ‘reasonable excuse’.
A reasonable excuse is also not defined under the 2011 Act, and would likely be dependent on the circumstances of the case. For example, when a person may themselves be involved or implicated in the offence and reporting might compel them to incriminate themselves, this would be a reasonable excuse. The Courts have held that a reasonable excuse may exist when there is some “physical or practical” difficulty in reporting the crime or if the information has already been disclosed.
Download your results as a PDF
Download as pdf link
Contributors
Australia
Pinsent Masons
Austria
GERLACH
Belgium
Van Olmen & Wynant
Brazil
CGM
Croatia
Babic & Partners
Denmark
IUNO
France
Proskauer
Germany
Oppenhoff
India
Khaitan & Co
Ireland
Arthur Cox
Italy
Zambelli & Partners
Japan
City-Yuwa
Latvia
Ellex Klavins
Lithuania
Ellex Valiunas
Luxembourg
Castegnaro
Malta
Camilleri Preziosi
Nigeria
Bloomfield LP
Poland
Baran Książek Bigaj
Portugal
Cuatrecasas
Romania
STALFORT Legal. Tax. Audit.
Singapore
Braddell Brothers LLP
Spain
Cuatrecasas
Sweden
Lindahl
United Kingdom
Proskauer
United States
Proskauer
Contributors
Germany
Oppenhoff
Ireland
Arthur Cox