WRITTEN QUESTION E-0340/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Whistleblowers

It has been argued that so-called whistleblowers can save companies (and governments) a great deal of money by putting a stop to fraud and mismanagement. The USA, reportedly, has legislation in the pipeline that will protect whistleblowers from negative repercussions.

Could the Commission please state the current situation and how it intends to deal with whistleblowers?

Does the current system offer, in the Commission's view, adequate protection for both whistleblowers and those accused of fraudulent behaviour?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(24 April 2002)

The Commission introduced a system for establishing the duty of EU civil servants to report any suspicions of wrongdoing and for providing officials with means of fulfilling that duty in 1999(1). The action was motivated mainly by the sensible considerations to which the Honourable Member draws attention in his question. The system inter alia offers protection from adverse consequences of blowing the whistle to officials who fulfil their obligation to report concerns about suspected serious wrongdoings in good faith.

In addition, under the provisions of the Commission's Administrative Reform strategy, a specific Decision on the subject was adopted by the Commission on 4 April 2002(2). That Decision completes the current legal framework by providing for the possibility of reporting evidence of serious wrongdoings outside the Commission, under certain conditions. Officials who meet these conditions will be protected from adverse consequences. A copy of the Decision will be sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's secretariat for information. The Decision will apply until the modifications to the Staff Regulations that are necessary to extend this regime to officials of all EU Institutions are adopted. For further information, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to the consultative document on this matter. A copy of that document will also be sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's secretariat.

In keeping with best practise, the Commission considers that the system set out in its decision of 4 April 2002 strikes a fair balance between the right to protection of the whistleblower and the right of those accused of fraudulent behaviour to be presumed innocent until shown by due process to be culpable. In addition, and also in keeping with best practise, officials will not be expected to prove that the wrongdoing has occurred, nor will they lose protection simply because their concern turned out not to be correct, provided that they could not have been expected to realise that.

The Commission emphasises that the rules on raising concerns about serious wrongdoings are not substitutes for grievance procedures where staff could have some personal interest in the outcome. Therefore, if it was proved that an official had not acted reasonably and honestly in reporting information to OLAF, that official would be open to disciplinary proceedings. In addition, those who may have been wrongly accused retain the right to ask the Commission for assistance in their actions against individuals spreading false accusations under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations.

(1) Commission Decision 1999/396/EC, ECSC, Euratom of 2 June 1999 concerning the terms and conditions for internal investigations in relation to the prevention of fraud, corruption and any illegal activity detrimental to the Communities' interests, OJ L 149, 16.6.1999.

(2) Commission Decision on raising concerns about serious wrongdoings, adopted by the Commission on 4 April 2002.