New EU-wide whistle-blower rules approved

/ Global Compliance Solutions Group LLC/

On April 16, the European Parliament voted(1) in favor of adopting new European Union (“EU”) wide standards to protect whistle-blowers. The standards are designed to protect whistle-blowers that reveal breaches of EU law in areas of public procurement, financial services and tax, money laundering, product and transport safety, protection of the environment, food and feed safety, animal health and welfare, nuclear safety, public health, security of network and information systems, competition, consumer and data protection, fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity affecting the use of Union expenditures.

The new rules allow whistle-blowers to disclose information either internally to the responsible legal entity, or national authorities, as well as any relevant EU institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies. The law prohibits reprisals and includes safeguards preventing the whistle-blower from being suspended, demoted or from facing other types of retaliation.

“Recent scandals such as LuxLeaks, Panama Papers and Football leaks have helped to shine a light on the great precariousness that whistle-blowers suffer today. On the eve of European elections, Parliament has come together to send a strong signal that it has heard the concerns of its citizens, and pushed for robust rules guaranteeing their safety and that of those persons who choose to speak out.” - Virginie Roziere (S&D, FR)

Some Adopted Text

“Persons who work for a public or private organisation or are in contact with it in the context of their work-related activities are often the first to know about threats or harm to the public interest which arise in this context. By ‘blowing the whistle’ they play a key role in exposing and preventing breaches of the law that are harmful to the public interest and in safeguarding the welfare of society. However, potential whistleblowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns or suspicions for fear of retaliation. In this context, the importance of providing balanced and effective whistleblower protection is increasingly acknowledged both at European and international level.”(2)

“To enjoy protection, the reporting persons should reasonably believe, in light of the circumstances and the information available to them at the time of the reporting, that the matters reported by them are true. This is an essential safeguard against malicious and frivolous or abusive reports, ensuring that those who, at the time of the reporting, deliberately and knowingly reported wrong or misleading information do not enjoy protection. At the same time, it ensures that protection is not lost where the reporting person made an inaccurate report in honest error. In a similar vein, reporting persons should be entitled to protection under this Directive if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported falls within its scope. The motives of the reporting person in making the report should be irrelevant as to whether or not they should receive protection.”(2)

Next Steps

EU ministers now need to approve the law. Once approved, member states will have two years to come into compliance with the law.

GCSG Advisory Professionals will be keeping up with the progress of this legislation. Contact us to learn more.

References

Italy Expands Whistleblower Protections

/ Global Compliance Solutions Group LLC/

Italy's Anti-corruption law, known as the Severino law (1), was promulgated in 2012.  The Severino law included public sector whistleblower protection provisions but it did not include protections for many private sector whistleblowers.  On November 30, 2017 a new law ("Law 179") was passed that included enhanced protections for public sector employees as well as more general protections for private sector whistleblowers. (2) 

Some of the important elements of Law 179 as it relates to public sector employees include:

  • A public employee that reports illegal conduct is not to be retaliated against
  • The anti-retaliation provisions for public employees now include employees of public economic entities, private law employees subject to public scrutiny, and to employees of contractors of companies supplying goods or services to the public administration
  • Allows for the reporting of violations to an internal officer, to the National Anti-Corruption Authority (3), an accounting authority, or to the judiciary
  • Reinforces the protection of the anonymity of a whistleblower

Some of the important elements of Law 179 as it relates to private sector employees:

  • Extends private sector employee protections beyond just the finance sector, insurance companies, and specific activities such as worker health and safety (4,5,6)
  • Requires companies that already have compliance programs to develop a whistleblower reporting program that includes at least one reporting mechanism allowing employees to report illegal conduct or potential violations and at least one confidential reporting mechanism that protects the whistleblower's identity
  • Requires companies should have a department responsible for managing the whistleblower program, procedures that provide guidance on what is covered and the protections provided, and allow for the discipline of employees that violate the procedures
  • Includes a prohibition against whistleblower retaliation  
  • The Company bears the burden of proof when a whistleblower makes a retaliation claim

Law 179 entered into force on December 29, 2017.

References:

Ninth Circuit adopts a broad whistleblower definition

/ Global Compliance Solutions Group LLC/

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on March 8, 2017, found that the whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act applied to employees who raise concerns internally, and not just to those employees who make reports directly to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC").  The ruling finds that the anti-retaliation provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act also protects employees fired after making internal disclosures of alleged unlawful activity under the Sarbanes Oxley Act and other laws, rules, and regulations. 

The Ninth Circuit decision in Somers v. Digital Realty Trust takes sides on an issue that has already resulted in a circuit split.  The Second Circuit ruled that Congress did not intend to limit protections to whistleblowers who disclosed information to the SEC.  The Sixth Circuit avoided the question altogether in a January decision, while the Fifth Circuit, the first to weigh in on the issue, ruled that Dodd-Frank limits the definition of "whistleblower" to those who report alleged securities violations to the SEC. 

Judge Schroeder said, "we conclude that the SEC regulation correctly reflects congressional intent to provide protection for those who make internal disclosures as well as to those who make disclosures to the SEC."

The anti-retaliation provision in question states:

"No employer may discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, directly or indirectly, or in any other manner discriminate against, a whistleblower in the terms and conditions of employment because of any lawful act done by the whistleblower

(I) in providing information to the Commission in accordance with this section;

(ii) in initiating, testifying in, or assisting in any investigation or judicial or administrative action of the Commission based upon or related to such information; or

(iii) in making disclosures that are required or protected under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.), this chapter, including section 78j-1(m) of this title, section 1513(e) of Title 18, and any other law, rule, or regulation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission."    

The issue decided by the Ninth Circuit involved subdivision (iii).  This provision was added after the bill went through Committee so there is no legislative history to explain its purpose.  The court ruled that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 mandate internal reporting and that this reporting is to occur before external reporting.  So, in the courts opinion, leaving employees without protection for the required internal reporting may result in early retaliation before the regulators were informed. 

This issue is almost certain to reach the Supreme Court to be resolved, unless Congress amends Dodd-Frank to clarify their intent.  Corporate General Counsels should keep an eye on this issue as it works its way through the courts.  GCSG will follow developments on this issue.  Contact us at info@globalcompliancesg.com with any question's or for more information. 

Key Links: