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

Abstract

Purpose

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/approach

With 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.

Findings

The 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/value

This 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.

Citation

Teichmann, F.M. and Wittmann, C. (2022), "Whistleblowing: procedural and dogmatic problems in the implementation of directive (EU) 2019/1937", Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 553-566. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRC-12-2021-0118