EU Whistleblower law approved, Zammit Dimech proposals adopted
The European Parliament yesterday approved an EU-wide whistleblowers law, with the proposals made by Maltese MEP Francis Zammit Dimech having been adopted.
Zammit Dimech said yesterday following the vote taken by the Committee on Legal Affairs: “It is a must to protect persons who report breaches of law, including corruption in public procurement and money laundering. This is in the public interest, as money which can be invested in more health services and housing is currently being sieved to the very few.
“This law is also about ensuring environmental and safety standards and consumer protection. Today’s vote will give whistleblowers adequate protection and remedy bad practices in member states.”
Zammit Dimech tabled amendments to ensure that persons who disclose information publicly qualify for protection where reporting persons have valid reasons to believe that there is collusion between the perpetrator of the breach and the competent authority or that evidence can be concealed and destroyed. These amendments were endorsed by various political groups.
Zammit Dimech reiterated that this legislation is also crucial for investigative journalists who at times serve as intermediaries or facilitators in the process. The law being proposed calls for such facilitators to be granted protection from retaliation. Earlier on, the EBU (European Broadcasting Union), EFJ (the European Federation of Journalists), EMMA (European Magazine Media Association), ENPA (the European Newspaper Association) and NME (News Media Europe) also asked MEPs to ensure that the proposed directive on the protection of whistleblowers guarantees a robust protection for persons choosing to turn to the media to report unlawful or wrongful acts.
Zammit Dimech said yesterday: “The Maltese government has over the past months used all its avenues to promote what it called an avant-garde move to introduce whistleblowing legislation. However, the reality is that this legislation is nothing more than part of an ongoing spin campaign by the government. In fact, the government protects and gives contracts to whistleblowers who blow a whistle which is pleasant to the government.
“On the other hand, people who unveil corruption are not given protection. Worse than that, the government systematically attacks people who turn out to be whistleblowers and tries to discredit them. This whistleblowing legislation is thus a counter-measure to the bad practices of a number of member states, including Malta.
“Corruption has an impact not only on the reputation of our country but on our lives, as money spent on infrastructure, projects, health services is pocketed by the very few when corruption is in place.
Earlier on this year, the committee responsible for media also adopted the recommendation of Zammit Dimech to strengthen the whistleblowing legislation. His recommendations included the right of appeal, protection of intermediaries, including journalists, and public disclosure.
Earlier this year, Zammit Dimech was also entrusted by the EPP Group in the European Parliament to serve as its Rapporteur on legislation concerning whistleblowers, after the European Commission proposed a new law last April to strengthen whistleblower protection across the EU.
Protection of whistleblowers is fragmented across the EU. In a report on media freedom and pluralism, Zammit Dimech outlined the fact that whistleblowers are crucial for investigative journalism. In this regard, he said that legalisation had to be strengthened because the Maltese government was boasting about the Whistleblower Act but, in reality, was only using it to protect and award tenders to whistleblowers who blow a whistle that pleases the government.
Various committees were involved in the process for this particular piece of legislation, but the principal committee is the Committee on Legal Affairs, of which Zammit Dimech is a member.
The amendments he tabled focus on the specific situations in which an individual may qualify for protection if he/she was reporting externally, or disclosing information on breaches that fall under the scope of this Directive.
They put importance on protection where the informant(s) would have reasonable grounds to believe that there would be retaliation for exposing the information.
Also, if internal and/or external channels are unreachable because of danger to the public interest, or in case of a risk of irreversible harm, the informant(s) have reason to believe that the offender and competent authority may conceal or destroy evidence; and that one acted in good faith and had reason to believe that the information they reported is correct – even if the judicial authorities did not recognise it as being a threat to the public interest.
This would be considered to be an innovative step for whistleblower laws as these amendments do not currently exist in the Maltese version of this legislation, and neither are they in the EU version of the current Whistleblower Act.
The original text was submitted by French MEP Geoffrey Didier from the EPP group, rather than by Zammit Dimech himself. Didier was the speaker for the EPP group with regard to the report in this particular committee, so these amendments have the backing of the EPP group.