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
Choose questions
Choose the questions you would like answering, or choose all for the full picture.
25. What are the risks for the whistleblower if there is abusive reporting or non-compliance with the procedure?
25. What are the risks for the whistleblower if there is abusive reporting or non-compliance with the procedure?
Flag / Icon
Germany
Germany
- at Oppenhoff
- at Oppenhoff
If a whistleblower abusively reports a violation, this may initially give rise to criminal liability. Possible criminal offences are pretending to have committed a criminal offence (section 145d of the Criminal Code), false suspicion (section 164 of the Criminal Code) or offences of honour (section 185 et seq of the Criminal Code).
The whistleblower providing the abusive information also must compensate for any damage resulting from intentional or grossly negligent reporting or disclosure of incorrect information (section 38 HinSchG). Furthermore, there may be competing claims for damages, for example under section 823 (2) of the Civil Code in conjunction with a protective law.
Moreover, the whistleblower commits an administrative offence if he or she intentionally discloses inaccurate information. This may be punished with a fine of up to 20,000 EUR (section 40 (1), (6) HinSchG).
In principle, the whistleblower is free to decide whether he or she reports a violation through the internal or the external reporting channel (section 7 (1) HinSchG). However, if a violation is disclosed to the public directly (ie, without first using internal or external reporting channels and without there being an exceptional circumstance for this), the whistleblower is generally not subject to the protection of sections 35 to 37 of the Whistleblower Protection Act. Only in narrow exceptions is the whistleblower still protected, for example, if there is a danger of irreversible damage or comparable circumstances may represent an immediate or obvious threat to the public interest.
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