On paper, Malta’s whistleblowing laws include strongly worded protections for whistle-blowers. In practice, however, many argue that the message to whistleblowers is that if they spill the beans on any abuse, they will be hounded. Whistle-blowers have been likened to bees: a whistle-blowing employee has only one sting to use, and using it may well lead to career suicide.
A report by the NGO Blueprint for Free Speech ranks Malta as the second best EU country for standards meant to protect whistle-blowers. Malta’s score of 59 per cent shows how much more needs to be done to make whistle-blower protection effective. Justice Minister Owen Bonnici admitted that: “It is very easy to speak about the rule of law. It’s harder to act and deliver to improve it.”
We certainly must improve the effectiveness of the rule of law process. The NGO’s report clearly states that: “Nearly every EU country fails to provide the rights and protections whistle-blowers need. Whistle-blowers face economic and emotional deprivation, victimisation and personal abuse and they receive little help from statutory authorities. The result is often career, financial and personal ruin.”
Many workplaces and institutions both in the private and public sectors suffer from a culture where employees are expected not to let the side down and in which whistle-blowing is seen as ‘sneaking’ on colleagues. Moreover, confidentiality clauses in many employment contracts effectively gaggle employees even when it is in the public interest that abuses are reported.
There is, of course, a risk of whistleblowing protection being abused. Acts motivated by personal gain or vendetta should be discouraged. The preliminary analysis of every claim made by a whistle-blower should be thorough to ensure that such claims are made in good faith. Employers should not be concerned more about how the information revealed by a whistle-blower got out than about what the information reveals about their organisation. The public interest should be the primary motivation to act on allegations of abuse. The European Commission estimated that in 2014 corruption cost the EU economy €120 billion.
Good legislation is only one element of an effective whistle-blower protection process. Other essential factors include a broad range of regulatory and public disclosure of information that is of interest to the public. Employers, regulators and public officials must end a culture in which they think they can ignore harassment and persecute whistle-blowers.
Perhaps the most crucial element and the most difficult to implement successfully is the imposition of penalties for whistle-blower retaliation and other mistreatment. Nicely worded legal clauses need to be backed up with the political will to punish those who threaten whistle-blowers openly with retribution.
Failure to implement good whistleblowing legislation will damage the interests of society. Whistle-blowers’ fear of retribution will prevent regulators and law enforcement officers from exploiting opportunities to investigate and prosecute guilty parties.
The public perception of whether whistle-blowers are genuinely protected from retaliation may not be as positive as the Blueprint for Free Speech report indicates. The way whistle-blowers on the Pilatus Bank saga have been treated does not augur well for an open, transparent way of dealing with abuse. Whistle-blowers must be reassured their jobs aren’t at risk if they expose abuse. This can only come when the government and its agencies’ actions match their lofty words.
This is a Times of Malta print editorial