Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Whistleblowing: procedural and dogmatic problems in the implementation of directive (EU) 2019/1937

Whistleblowing: procedural and dogmatic problems in the implementation of directive (EU) 2019/1937 This paper aims to enlighten the shortcomings of the EU Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973, which could interfere negatively with its successful national implementation. In focus is the tension between companies potentially attempting to hide misconduct and disgruntled employees taking advantage of generous protection under the directive.Design/methodology/approachWith an extensive literary basis, this paper explores articles of the EU Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973 under five areas of the so-called “weakness.” With view to Germany and Austria, the difficulty of implementing the directive is highlighted and likewise with view to Switzerland, a potential solution is presented.FindingsThe Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973 overshoots its target by protecting whistleblowers without considering the wider public interest. There are specific points of arbitrary definition which demand resolution to ensure a successful national implementation.Originality/valueThis is a multifaceted discussion of a highly contentious ethical debate. Through an exploration of specific points of the Directive, it is possible to present why there are points of contention in the first place, and also the difficulty of implementing the principle of proportionality. The issue at the heart of the matter is balancing the protection of trade secrets with the fundamental necessity of whistleblowing as a means of last resort. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance Emerald Publishing

Whistleblowing: procedural and dogmatic problems in the implementation of directive (EU) 2019/1937

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/whistleblowing-procedural-and-dogmatic-problems-in-the-implementation-qJSAFFbwJU
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
1358-1988
eISSN
1358-1988
DOI
10.1108/jfrc-12-2021-0118
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This paper aims to enlighten the shortcomings of the EU Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973, which could interfere negatively with its successful national implementation. In focus is the tension between companies potentially attempting to hide misconduct and disgruntled employees taking advantage of generous protection under the directive.Design/methodology/approachWith an extensive literary basis, this paper explores articles of the EU Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973 under five areas of the so-called “weakness.” With view to Germany and Austria, the difficulty of implementing the directive is highlighted and likewise with view to Switzerland, a potential solution is presented.FindingsThe Whistleblowing Directive 2019/1973 overshoots its target by protecting whistleblowers without considering the wider public interest. There are specific points of arbitrary definition which demand resolution to ensure a successful national implementation.Originality/valueThis is a multifaceted discussion of a highly contentious ethical debate. Through an exploration of specific points of the Directive, it is possible to present why there are points of contention in the first place, and also the difficulty of implementing the principle of proportionality. The issue at the heart of the matter is balancing the protection of trade secrets with the fundamental necessity of whistleblowing as a means of last resort.

Journal

Journal of Financial Regulation and ComplianceEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 26, 2022

Keywords: Business ethics; Whistleblowing; EU 2019/1937; National law; Union law

References