Whistleblowing

The whistleblower can choose one of the following reporting channels:

• internal via its hierarchy in the company or the referent designated by the employer according to the applicable whistleblowing procedure; or
• external, either after having made an internal report, or directly to:
  • the competent authority among those designated by a future decree;
  • the Defender of Rights, who will direct them to the authority or authorities best able to handle it;
  • the judicial or administrative authority; or
  • an institution, body or agency of the European Union competent to collect information on violations falling within the scope of the 2019 Directive. 

A decree to be published will establish the list of authorities competent to collect and process external alerts.

Eventually, public disclosure of the alert is possible in the following situations:

• no appropriate action has been taken in response to an alert made by an external channel at the end of a certain time set by decree;
• imminent or obvious danger to the public; or
• when an external notification would run the risk of retaliation or would not allow an effective remedy for the subject of the disclosure (for example, suspicion of conflict of interest, risk of concealment or destruction of evidence and collusion).

There is no legally binding hierarchy between internal and external reporting channels. Therefore, the whistleblower has, in principle, the right to choose whether to report the violations externally or internally. However, in cases where effective internal action can be taken against violations, whistleblowers are to give preference to reporting to an internal reporting office. If an internally reported violation is not remedied, the whistleblower making the report is free to contact an external reporting office (section 7 (1) HinSchG).