State of Whistleblowing in the EU: “It takes a village to make effective protection of whistleblowers a reality”
The adoption of the Whistleblower Directive in 2019 provided a solid groundwork for the protection of whistleblowers in the European Union but the work is far from complete. Significant challenges remain in this space and that is why maintaining and defending a community for the protection of whistleblowers remains more vital than ever. These were some of the key messages left by the speakers of Panel I: The State of Whistleblowing in the European Union of the European Whistleblowing Conference, moderated by Dr Dimitrios Kafteranis, EWI’s Co-Founder and Director of Research.
“It has been four years since I boarded the train of institutional whistleblower protection and, since then, I have experienced effective assistance to whistleblowers but I have also experienced serious delays in proceedings”, shared Zuzana Dlugosova, President of Slovakia’s Whistleblower Protection Office and Vice-Chair of the Network of European Integrity and Whistleblowing Authorities (NEIWA). Other examples she provided include clashes with political power that resulted in financial sanctions imposed on the Interior Ministry for “violating the law”, attempts to change the law to reduce the standard of protection, and threats by politicians to abolish her office and prosecute its representatives.
“We see that there is a lot of work to be done but, on a positive note, we have to admit that, six years ago, we would not have imagined that states would have dedicated so much institutional energy to whistleblowing protection.”
And to that, it was essential the combined efforts of several actors, because “it really takes a village to make effective protection of whistleblowers a reality”. Yes, institutionalizing protection was “a big step forward”, says Dlugosova, but it is also necessary to have support from political leaders, private managers, NGOs, effective and impartial law enforcement authorities, reflections from the academic world and judicial decisions.
The same message was reinforced by Anna Myers, Executive Director of the Whistleblowing International Network (WIN), who considers that having just a law in place is not enough “because that is a back-up mechanism”. “That is so important but what whistleblowers need is support and they need not to be the only messenger because ultimately that puts them in an isolated and easily squashed position”, said Myers.
“In an odd sense”, continued Myers, “it is not about whistleblowers”, but about the public interest and accountability. For Myers, accountability was the biggest pioneering aspect of the Whistleblower Directive. “It is one of the first legal instruments to actually recognize that institutions have obligations because most of the laws before that were about protecting from interference, which meant that you had to suffer retaliation before you took a case to court”, she said.
“Now there is the ability to hold institutions to account for failing to deal properly with whistleblowing.”
The role of institutions
When the first calls for a horizontal EU legislation on whistleblower protection were echoed in 2016, “nobody in the Commission knew much about whistleblower protection”, admitted Georgia Georgiadou, Deputy Head of the Unit on Fundamental Rights Policies of the Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (DG JUST) of the European Commission. “It is thanks to the hard work, dedication, and perseverance of several politicians, public servants, academics, and a few faceless eurocrats that we have now in place state-of-the-art legal standards”, she said.
However, cautioned Georgiadou, laying down the groundwork is just the first step “in a long journey”. “Even the most sophisticated protection regime can only be fully effective if it is supported by an overall enabling environment”, she stressed. “We are trying to build this overall favorable ecosystem for whistleblowing and a key element of this ecosystem is awareness”, concluded Georgiadou.
“The BRIGHT project is a bright and shining example of the kind of actions we aim to support.”
Speaking on the role of the Council of Europe, Anna-Kristiina Mikkonen, Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of that organization, gave an update on the report “Ensuring better protection of whistleblowers in Europe”, of which she is the rapporteur. She explained that the main focus of this report will be to identify how states are complying with existing international standards, the Council of Europe’s recommendations, and the EU Directive.
Mikkonen, who is also a Member of the Finnish Parliament, further explained that she is aiming to finalize the report in early 2026 and that it will not survey all 46 states of the Council of Europe. Rather, the report will highlight a few states where shortcomings in national frameworks have been reported.
“I have received reports of concerns about a number of states, including Iceland and Serbia.”
This event, led by the European Whistleblowing Institute, took place in Brussels, on 4 April, and was a collaboration with the Network of European Integrity and Whistleblowing Authorities (NEIWA), Transparency International (TI), Transparency International Greece, Whistleblowing International Network (WIN), EDHEC Business School, University of Galway, and Georg-August-University Göttingen. This event is part of Project BRIGHT 101143234, which is co-funded by the European Commission.
