EU court strengthens protection of whistleblowers at EU institutions

In the EU, whistleblowers are to be protected from reprisals, particularly by employers. This is provided for in a directive adopted by the EU Parliament in 2019. The General Court of the European Union (EGC) has ruled that the EU institutions themselves must also be measured against this. The Luxembourg judges complained that the EU Parliament had breached regulations in the case of an accredited assistant. The House of Representatives had not taken all necessary measures to "guarantee the person concerned balanced and effective protection against all forms of reprisals".

The parliamentary assistant reported cases of harassment and financial irregularities relating to an MEP. He was then initially assigned to another MEP and subsequently relieved of his duties altogether following alleged retaliatory measures. In its judgment in case T-793/22, the General Court has now partially upheld his claim. The judges also annulled Parliament's tacit decision not to adopt additional protective measures. They also ordered the House of Representatives to pay 10,000 euros to the person concerned for the non-material damage suffered.

The assistant initially demanded compensation of 200,000 euros. He felt that not only the protection requirements had been violated, but also the confidentiality of his identity. The EGC found that the Parliament had disclosed the status of the person concerned as a whistleblower without his consent, thereby exposing him to the risk of reprisals. According to the judges, the non-renewal of the contract of the person concerned was in principle in line with the applicable regulations. It is important for an accredited parliamentary assistant to maintain a "working relationship characterized by trust" with the MPs he works for.

Time off work must not be the only option

However, according to the ruling, Parliament failed to prove that it had taken all precautions to prevent the person concerned from being harmed as a result of his ringing the alarm bells. The administration had limited itself to informing the person concerned that the exemption from duties was the only conceivable protective measure. Parliament has two months to appeal against the ruling to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

The instruments of the directive are far-reaching. They include, for example, an anti-discrimination law with a broad personal scope of application. In addition, there is comprehensive protection for whistleblowers against pressure such as dismissal, bullying, damage to reputation or "other disadvantages". However, this does not apply unconditionally. As a rule, grievances must first be reported confidentially within companies and authorities via suitable internal channels. Whistleblowers can also contact higher-level whistleblower offices directly, as well as in the event of irreversible damage, the threat of specific reprisals and in the absence of prompt feedback to the media.

(mma)