Protection and remedies available to the employee after blowing the whistle : an analysis of current and proposed law

Abstract

Whistleblowing has gained recognition over the years around the world due to its role in uncovering illicit activities. Research has shown that a number of unfortunate events could have been avoided had adequate legislation been enacted securing the whistleblower's position. The introductory chapter of this work delves into how the term has expanded over time, as research in the field increased. The chapter also identifies characteristics of a typical whistleblower and other variables which push or limit the informant from blowing the whistle, while discussing whether the act of whistleblowing is ultimately a right or a duty. The subsequent chapter then makes an evaluation of current international legislation which has recognized whistleblowing as a mechanism to eliminate corruption. The second part of this chapter looks into the protection and remedies available under the Employment and Industrial Relations Act 2002, specifically under Article 28 and other scattered provisions of the same Act, which have yielded no results, leaving the Maltese whistleblower with no option but to look away. In keeping to its commitments with international conventions and recommendations, along with European Union legislation, the Maltese legislator has proposed a Whistleblower Protection Act which provisions are extensively discussed in Chapter III. Most parts of the law have been modelled on British law and although most of the provisions are innovative to the Maltese employment context, others seem inadequate to the domestic business context. Notwithstanding the proposed legislation would satisfy international recommendations, it is arguable whether it provides enough incentives or security for the employee to blow the whistle. A critique and recommendations are offered in the final chapter of this work.