[attach id=265133 size="medium"]Justice Parliamentary Secretary Owen Bonnici. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi[/attach]

Government departments, large companies and certain NGOs had to set up their own internal whistleblower units to investigate cases involving alleged corruption, Justice Parliamentary Secretary Owen Bonnici said yesterday.

Dr Bonnici said that once this was done, such entities could then pass on the case to the central whistleblower unit, which would incorporate public bodies and competent authorities established by law.

Piloting the Protection of the Whistleblower Bill, Dr Bonnici said the companies that were bound to set their own whistleblower internal unit had to satisfy two of three criteria: had no fewer than 250 employees and either presenting a balance sheet of more than €43 million a year or declaring a turnover of €50 million.

The voluntary organisations obliged to set up such units were those that raised over €500,000 per annum.

He said that after just four months in office, the Government had presented in Parliament the Whistleblower Act and the removal of prescription for politicians to fight corruption effectively. The previous Administration, he said, had failed to do so in 25 years in government. Dr Bonnici said the Bill contained significant differences from the one proposed by the previous Administration. When approved, the Bill would put Malta in line with the main recommen-dations laid down by the Council of Europe.

While the previous Bill afforded protection only to honest people who decided to reveal wrong-doing, the proposed Bill not only protected such individuals but also envisaged incentives to whistleblowers who had also committed some wrongdoing themselves. Such incentives would make the Bill more effective.

Wrongdoers who turned whistleblowers still had to shoulder responsibility for their actions.

But they could be given either a mitigated sentence or be found guilty without being sentenced.

Also, at the discretion of the Attorney General, the whistleblower could be given a certificate of immunity and put under a Witness Protection Programme.

The Attorney General did not have a blanket provision but had to consult the Commissioner of Police and a judge of the Superior Courts before giving immunity.

A report had also to be made to the President.

Whistleblowers would be liable for civil damages only for their share in the corruption being dealt with. Dr Bonnici said that, in contrast with the previous Bill, this Whistleblower Act would now provide for acts of corruption committed in the past.

The Bill also redefined the definition of employee and included candidate employees who reported corruption in the public and private sectors.