CHAPTER – 1

INTRODUCTION

1. Introduction

The phrase “whistleblowing” is a new phrase in the public and corporate affairs;
however, the concept itself is old dated. It denotes to the practice by which insiders after
noticing the malpractice within the organization and not able to redress the matter from
the inside the organization, go outside the organization with their claims1.
Whistleblowing is recognised as a means of curtailing corruption in an organisation by
revealing information about the illegal or corrupt activities and helps in enhancing the
inner organizational culture of an organisation and ultimately improves internal
management and efficiency. All over the globe, whistleblowers are addressed as heroes or
role models for their act of disclosing corruption, fraud, illegal act or mal-administration
in an organisation. However being a whistleblower is not so trouble-free. Many of those
who bring such issues in the light also have to face brutal consequences for their acts. In
most of the cases, whistleblowers place their own lives to immense personal threats with
the purpose of shield the civic welfare. They put their careers in jeopardy in order to
uncover fraud, corruption or wrongdoing. They may lose their jobs or charged with
violating employment agreements or other laws. They are harassed both mentally and
physically a lot. They frequently face legal litigations for their actions.

1.2 Origin of the term “Whistleblowing”

Whistleblowing as the name speaks for itself means to blow the whistle. It is
uncertain to find out the origin of the term “whistleblowing”. The term is generally
believed to be derived from the whistle a train sounds to warn people to get off the track,
or a sport referee blowing a whistle to indicate a foul or rule infraction in game2, or a
English policemen (bobbies) blowing whistle to alert others to an illegal act or to stop
wrongdoing3.

1
Dr. Devakumar Jacob, “Collateral Damage: An Urgent Need for Legal Apparatus for Protection
of Whistleblowers & RTI Activists” 19 IOSR-JHSS 1 (2014), available at:
http://iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol19-issue4/Version-7/A019470109.pdf (Visited on
January 27, 2016).
2
Available at: http://layman-blog.blogspot.in/2014/05/whistleblowing-origin-meaning-
problems.html. (Visited on December 10,2015).
3
Available at: http://employment-law.freeadvice.com/employment-law/firing/whistleblower.htm.
(Visited on December 10, 2015).

1
 Earlier when a person raises his voice against any wrongdoing or
mismanagement, he was treated as an informer or snitches or traitor. But it was
U.S. consumer activists Ralph Nader who introduced the phrase ‘whistleblower’ in
the early 1970s so that the adverse imputation reflected in other words like
“informers” and “snitches” can be evaded 4.

1.3 Meaning of the term “Whistleblowing” and “Whistleblower”

Whistleblowing normally refer to public interest disclosure by employees

about wrongful acts, illegal or wrongful conduct within the organisation. It is the
process of reporting of a concern or issue to proper authorities about a wrongdoing
within an organization. The reported concern must be a genuine concern about a
crime, breach of law, direct risk to the security, vigour and wellbeing of others and
to the environment.5

The scope of the phrase ‘whistleblowing’ is very broad and it denotes to a

situation where the general public/ proper authorities and the courts are informed
about the fact of arbitrariness, illegality or misconduct performed by the
‘Dominant Personality’. The term ‘Dominant Personality’ here refers to the State,
its agencies and even the private employers, who by character of their post and
other means are able to cover up the unlawful activity. 6

A whistleblower is a being who reports to the public or some proper officer

or agency about pleaded fraudulent, illegitimate actions or any unlawful practices
happening in an organization. 7 The pleaded illegitimate action may be breach of
laws, rules which endangers the social interests like health and wellbeing of
others. There are two ways to revealing information, i.e., internally or externally.

A whistleblower is a person who blows a whistle or raises his voice against

the inappropriate, illegal or illegitimate activity going on inside the organisation

4
Shikha Patheja, “System of Whistle Blowing in India”, 4, IJSR 361 (2015), available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283083726_System_of_Whistle_Blowing_in_India
(Visited on January 12, 2016).
5
Available at: http://wbhelpline.org.uk/about-us/what-is-whistleblowing/ (Visited on December 21,
2015).
6
Praveen Dalal, “Technology is the Best Whistle Blower in India”, available at:
http://ptlb.in/iips/?=103. (Visited on April 13, 2015).
7
Available at: http://www.esdaw.eu/whistleblower.html (Visited on May 1, 2015).

2
and informs the public or concerned authority. Such person could be an employee
or any person who is insider or outsider of an organisation 8.

In simple words, it can be concluded that the disclosure of mismanagement,

misconduct, corruption, illegal activity etc. by a person, generally an insider
(employee) of the organisation to the proper authorities or to the public, is called
whistleblowing and the person disclosing or raising his voice is called
whistleblower.

1.4 Who can be a whistleblower?

A whistleblower is someone who discloses any wrongdoing,

mismanagement, improper or illegal activity, corruption or fraud of an
organisation to the top management of the organisation or to the public. Generally,
he is the employee (present or former) of the same organisation because he would
be the first person who will come to know of all illegal activities inside the
organisation at an early stage. But even an outsider to the organisation can be a
whistleblower. Thus, any person whether he is insider (employee) or outsider
(general public) to the organisation can be a whistleblower if the primary objective
of their disclosure is to serve public good by exposing wrongdoing, illegal or
inappropriate activity going on inside the organisation.

In the case of Manoj H. Mishra v Union of India 9, the Apex Court ruled that for a
person to be accepted as a whistleblower, the basic requirements are:

(a) The principal purpose for reporting the concern should be to cleanse the
organization and to advance the public good.
(b) By reporting such concern, the public interest is better served.
1.5 Purpose of Whistleblowing

The primary object of whistleblowing should be to advance the public interest

rather than personal interest. In whistleblowing, there should not be any ulterior or
selfish motive. Thus, the purpose of whistleblowing can be summarised as following:

8
Rajasree P R, “Whistleblowing: Indian Paradigm and Blemishes,” available at:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2258296&download=yes. (Visited on
December 12, 2015).
9
(2013) 6 SCC 313.

3
(a) To draw attention of proper authorities to unethical, inappropriate or illegal
conduct which has or may have adverse effects either for the organisation or to
the public at large10.
(b) To eliminate unethical behaviour in the workplace by disclosing the
wrongdoing and ultimately encourage a culture of integrity, transparency and
accountability in organization11.
(c) It also covers those situations where an individual has the knowledge of any
activity which is harmful and has the courage to make the disclosure while
others involved are not aware of it or are reluctant to make the disclosure due
to fear12.
1.6 Definitions of the term “Whistleblowing” or “Whistleblower”

The phrase ‘whistleblowing’ does not have any commonly agreed legal
definition. However, a common understanding of the concept emerges from various
definitions that have been developed overtime. Some of the important definitions of
the term “whistleblowing” or “whistleblower” are as follows:-

1. The U.S. consumer advocate Ralph Nader defines the expression

whistleblowing as “An act of a man or woman who, believing that the public
interest overrides the interest of the organisation he serves, blows the whistle
that the organisation is involved in corrupt, illegal, fraudulent or harmful
activity.”13
2. According to Janet P. Near and Marcia P. Miceli, “the disclosure by
organisation members (former or current) of illegal, immoral or illegitimate
practices under the control of their employers, to persons or organisations
that may be able to effect action.”14 According to them, whistleblowing
contains four steps:-

10
Atmadeep Das, “Whistle Blowing”, available at: http://www.slideshare.net/dasatmadeep31/
whistle-blowing-33938027?next_slideshow=1. (Visited on January 23, 2015).
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Nader, Petkas, and Blackwell, Whistleblowing (1972). Quoted in Nicholas M Rongine, Toward a
Coherent Legal Response to the Public Policy Dilemma Posed by Whistleblowing, American
Business Law Journal, Summer 1985. Vol. 23,Iss. 2.
14
Janet P. Near and Marcia P. Miceli, “Organizational dissidence: The case of Whistleblowing”, 4,
JoBE 1 (1985), available at: https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/99pc.html (Visited on
January 20, 2016).

4
 (a) The organization or employer is involved in any corrupt or illegal actions
and this forces a worker to think about reporting the concern.
(b) The worker measures the gravity of the corrupt or illegal action and
collects further information, and talks about the circumstances with staff.
(c) The worker has variety of options, i.e. he can report the concern; he can
resign from his job or he can remain silent.
(d) Organisation associates or employer reciprocates against the
whistleblower15.
3. According to Koehn, “Whistleblowing occurs when an employee informs the
public of inappropriate activities going on inside the organisation.” 16
4. According to the United Kingdom’s Committee on Standards in Public Life,17
whistleblowing means, “raising a concern about malpractice within an
organisation or within an independent structure associated with it”18
5. According to the definition of the International Labour Organisation (ILO)
whistleblowing involves, “the reporting by employees or former employees of
illegal, irregular, dangerous or unethical practice by employers.”19
6. The term Whistleblower has been defined by R.M. Green. According to him,
“A whistleblower is an employee who, perceiving an organisational practice
that he believes to be illegal or unethical, seeks to stop this practice by
altering top management, or failing that, by notifying authorities outside the
organisation.”20

Thus, after going through the above mentioned definitions as a whole, then the
general meaning which can be obtained from these definitions is that whistleblowing
is the practice of disclosing the misconducts, illegal, unethical or inappropriate
activities, or wrongdoings occurring in the organisations. These activities can be

15
Ibid.
16
Chanjyot Kaur, “Whistleblowing: An Anti Corruption Tool” 1 IJARMSS 48 (2012), available at:
https://www.academia.edu/5450828/WHISTLE_BLOWING_AN_ANTI-
CORRUPTION_TOOL_INTRODUCTION (Visited on January 12, 2016).
17
The Committee is an independent, advisory non-departmental public body established in 1994. It
advises the Prime Minister on ethical standards across the whole of the public life in England.
18
Guy Dehn, “Whistleblowing & Integrity: A New Perspective”, available at: https://www.cfoi.org.
uk/pdf/corruptiongd.pdf (Visited on January 10, 2016).
19
ILO Thesaurus 2005, available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ILO-Thesaurus/english/
index.htm (Visited on January 12, 2016).
20
Ibid.

5
disclosed to the top management within the organisation or making the disclosure
outside the organisation, i.e. to the government, to the media etc.

1.7 Pre-requisites for Whistleblowing

Generally, it is considered that there are three main causes or concerns which
dishearten individuals for not disclosing unlawful activity.
These causes are:
(i) Worry of aftermath or after-effect;
(ii) The assumption that nothing will change even after reporting the concern;
(iii) Ambiguity about how, where and to whom to raise the concern. 21

Thus, the State or organization who desires from its citizens that they must report
wrongdoing then it must address these concerns on the priority basis. Generally,
whistleblowing contains the following pre-conditions22:

(a) Whistleblowers should be convinced that they will be protected in case they
blew the whistle and that their decision to disclose the wrongdoing will not
bring any undesirable consequences either personally or professionally. This is
necessary not only to infuse courage in employees, but also to build an
atmosphere of mutual faith and a culture of fairness and trustworthiness. In
addition to this, there are chances that employee having knowledge about acts
of corruption etc. in the organization may face retaliation from his employee.
Thus, a structure must subsist to provide every kind of protection to the
whistleblower.23
(b) Whistleblowers should have reasonable faith that disclosing the information
will be in public interest and some good must be achieved. They should
believe that the authority will take suitable action against the wrongdoers. This

21
Marie Terracol, “A Best Practice Guide for Whistleblowing Legislation”, 2018 Transparency
International, available at: https://www.transparency.org/.../best_practice_guide_for_whistle
blowing_legislation. (Visited on March 2, 2015).
22
C. Raj Kumar, “Corruption in India: A Violation of Human Rights, Promoting Transparency and
the Right to Good Governance”, University of California, Davis, 49:741, 751, ( 2015), available
at: https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/49/2/Symposium/49-2_Kumar.pdf. (Visited on
March 5, 2015).
23
Chris Wheeler, “Drafting and Implementing Whistleblower Protection Laws, in Controlling
Corruption in Asia and the Pacific” 127-145 (Asian Development Bank, 2004), available at:
http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanti-corruptioninitiate/regionalseminars/35137772.pdf. (Visited
on May 23, 2015).

6
 will infuse confidence and trust within the whistleblowers. The authenticity of
any anti-corruption authority in relied upon the courage and trust it can create
among the people. People will raise the concern if the authority guarantees
that it will take suitable action on the complaint. This depends upon the
prestige of the authority and other aspects like neutrality, impartiality,
practical autonomy, working competence and economic independence of the
organization. Thus, it is essential to make sure that these aspects exist in the
organization in order to encourage the whistleblower to come ahead and report
the illegal or corrupt activity. 24
(c) Whistleblowers should be conscious that they have the power to make
disclosures. They must have the knowledge about the manner and process of
making the disclosure which also includes to whom, how and what
information can be disclosed to the authority. Usually, whistleblowers don’t
know which matter is not to be revealed as there is no appropriate direction
exists in this respect. This is a critical aspect for whistleblowing to be
fruitful. 25
1.8 Key Characteristics/ Features of Whistleblowing

Every act of revealing or disclosing corruption, illegal activity or inappropriate

conduct can’t be termed as whistleblowing. Various definitions discussed above bring
to light a number of key features of whistleblowing. Thus, for any disclosure to be
treated as whistleblowing following characteristics must be present.

(a) Disclosure of Wrongdoing:-

The whistleblowing must refer to the disclosing of wrongdoing. The
wrongdoing can be past, continuing or future. In case of past wrongdoings, the
purpose of whistleblowing is to rectify it or made the wrongdoer accountable.
In case of continuing and future wrongdoings, the purpose is to end the
wrongdoings or to prevent the happening of wrongdoings respectively and
hold the wrongdoer accountable for the same 26.

24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.
26
Kathleen Clark, “White Paper on the Law of Whistleblowing”, 2012, available at:
http://papers.ssrn.com/ sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176293. (Visited on March 12, 2015).

7
(b) Nature of Wrongdoing:-
The wrongdoing which is disclosed includes a breach of law, following any
unethical practice such as fraud, violation of laws, rules or danger to social
interests such as, health and wellbeing or corruption.
(c) Non Public Information:-
Information which is disclosed by a whistleblower about an organisation must
be non-public information. Non-public information is that information which
is not known by the general public 27.
(d) Serves Public Interest:-
In place of personal grievance, there exists a public interest element in
whistleblowing. The wrongdoing must have a direct danger for security, health
and safety of others. The aim of whistleblowing is to advance the public
interest. Thus, the disclosure should be made in the public interest. A
disclosure is in public interest when an individual reveals some information
that tends to show past, present or future improper conduct by a government
official or institution in the exercise of its functions to proper authority.28
(e) Internal or External Whistleblowing:-
The act of whistleblowing can be performed either internally i.e. to the
authority or employer inside the institution) or externally i.e. to the media or to
law administration authorities like police. 29.
(f) It is a Voluntary act:-
Whistleblowing is purely a voluntary act of a person or group (NGO etc).
There is no external force to make an act of whistleblowing 30.
1.9 Types of Whistleblowing

Depending on the fact, by whom and to whom the wrongdoing is disclosed

and sector of economy covered, whistleblowing can be classified into various types.

27
Conceptual and Regulatory Framework on Whistle Blowing, available at:
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/92704/10/10_chapter%202.pdf . (Visited on
April 12, 2016).
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.

8
1.9.1 To Whom Information is Made (Recipients of the Information)31
(i) Internal Whistleblowing:-
When employee or any person reports the illegal activity, wrongdoing or
misconduct to the concerned authority within the organisation, it is termed internal
whistleblowing and the person is known as internal whistleblower. In this case, the
main object of blowing the whistle is to get the wrongdoing or misconduct
investigated as per the procedures of the organisation in this regard.
(ii) External Whistleblowing:-
When employee or any person discloses the information about illegal activity
or misconduct to the people outside the organisation like media, civil societies,
lawyers etc. it is called external whistleblowing and the person disclosing the
information is external whistleblower. 32
1.9.2 Against Whom Information is Disclosed (Type of the Organisation
Covered)33
(i) Public Whistleblowing:-
When a disclosure is made about the wrongdoings or unethical or illegal
practices carried on by public officials, it is called public whistleblowing. In other
words, when a whistleblower raises his voice against the public organisation which is
guilty of practising such activities which are against the public interests, such
disclosure is known as public whistleblowing.
(ii) Private Whistleblowing:-
Where the illegal practice or wrongdoing is going on is a private organisation
and information about the same practice is disclosed by a whistleblower, then it is
called the private whistleblowing.
1.9.3 By Whom Disclosure is Made (Providers of the Information) 34
(i) Open Whistleblowing:-
When the person making the disclosure reveals his identity to the authority, it
is called open whistleblowing.

31
Supra note 27.
32
Ibid.
33
Ibid.
34
Adishhalarnkar, “Whistleblowers and Their Protection in India: An Overview”, available at:
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1693/Whistleblowers-and-their-Protection-in-
India.html. (Visited on August 11, 2016).

9
(ii) Anonymous Whistleblowing:-
When the person makes the disclosure without revealing his identity or asks
the authority not to reveal his identity, it is called anonymous whistleblowing.
1.9.4 Effects of Wrongdoing on whom
(i) Personal Whistleblowing:-
When the organisational wrongdoings are to harm one personally, disclosing
such wrongdoings is called personal whistleblowing. 35 Though it is not justified
morally, it is desirable only when there is danger to one’s freedom or dignity 36.
(ii) Impersonal Whistleblowing:-
When the wrongdoing is to harm others, it is called impersonal
whistleblowing. 37
1.10 Importance/ Significance of Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing facilitates the disclosure of wrongful acts or corruption that is

against the interests and ideals of the organisation. Its purpose is not to cause damage
to the organisation. 38 Thus, the importance of whistleblowing can be summarised as
follows:-

(a) Means to Democracy:-

Democracy demands people’s participation in decisions that affect their lives.
Democracy is a political arrangement in which people vote for those who will
formulate laws that touch them. However, today resolutions or policies formulated by
every kind of institution have effect on people. So, people must have knowledge
about the resolutions made in the organisations that are going to touch them.
Whistleblowing performs a part in furnishing that information and thus is medium to
promote democracy. 39
(b) Tool to Check Corruption:-
Whistleblowing is recognised as a tool to reduce corruption or illegal
activities in an organisation by reporting about unlawful, unethical, corrupt or

35
Ibid.
36
Shahzad Khan, “Whistleblower”, available at: http://www.slideshare.net/sk_prince/whistle-
blower (Visited on May 12, 2016).
37
Supra note 35.
38
Sonal Nagpal, “Whistle Blowing Mechanism – A Move towards Better Corporate Governance”, 3
GJMBS 856 (2013), available at: https://www.ripublication.com/gjmbs_spl/gjmbsv3n8_05.pdf.
(Visited on July 1, 2016).
39
Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1998293 (Visited on February
10,2016).

10
dangerous conducts taking place in the organisation. Thus, whistleblowing is an
important anti-corruption tool.40
(c) Improves internal Organisational Culture:-
Whistleblowing is also helpful in boosting the inner culture, management and
efficiency of organisations. 41 Whistleblowing promotes organisational learning and
development through the reporting of misconduct that directly or indirectly acts
against organisational goals, ethical guidelines or legislation. 42 It ensures good
working environment in the organisation. It gives a strong message to all levels that
bad organisational practice will not be tolerated. It assures employees that their
concerns are important and any type of harassment and discrimination will not be
tolerated against them.
The UK Committee on Standards in Public Life highlighted the significance of
whistleblowing to the interior life of the institutions by saying that when wrongdoing
is reported internally and it is investigated and addressed fairly and properly by the
authority, then it promotes healthy organisational culture within the organisation. 43
(d) Promotes Good Governance:-
Effective whistleblowing policies are indispensable part of good governance
in any organisation. By having whistleblower policy in an organization the employees
remain motivated to stand up against the wrongdoing. They may have the confidence
that they can report any wrongdoing without any worry of retaliation. Thus,
whistleblowing policies which are essential for good governance promote open
culture in the organisation which ultimately benefits the organisations, individuals and
society as a whole. 44

40
Available at: http://wbhelpline.org.uk/about-us/what-is-whistleblowing/ (Visited on December
21, 2015).
41
David Banisar, “Whistleblowing: International Standards and Developments”, available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228124587_Whistleblowing_International_Standards_a
nd_Developments (Visited on March 19, 2015).
42
Marit Skivenes and Sissel C. Trygstad, “Whistleblowing in local Government: An Empirical
Study of Contact Patterns and Whistleblowing in 20 Norwegian Municipalities”, 39, SPS, 265
(2016)., available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-9477.12066. (Visited
on November 22, 2015).
43
Government of U.K., 10th Report on Getting the Balance Right Implementing Standards of
Conduct in Public Life (January, 2005), available at: https://www.gove.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/336897/10thFullReport.pdf.(Visited on Janurary 1, 2016).
44
Available at: https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/Whistleblowing%20Commission%20
Report% 20Final.pdf (Visited on February 10, 2016).

11
(e) Ensures Government’s Accountability:-
Today, the government possesses vast powers. It is significant to ensure that
government exercise these powers for welfare of society. In order to have check or
control on these powers, it is necessary to give access to the people to government
actions.45 Whistleblowing is a democratic right which is implicit in the freedom of
speech and expression which promotes openness in government and democratic
answerability. It is an important tool to make government accountable for their
activities and enhances government’s effectiveness and further it also advances public
trust in government work.
(f) Serves Public Interest:-
Whistleblowing laws are founded on the basic principles of freedom of speech
and expression and freedom of information. Since public is interested in actions of the
government so it is the duty of Government to facilitate and encourage
whistleblowing and protect public interest whistleblowers. The Whistle Blowers
Protection Act, 2014 is the safe alternative to the silence and to serve the public
interest46.
(g) Beneficial to Society:-
Whistleblowing is also beneficial to society as public money is saved as early
alerts can be means to diffuse a potentially larger disaster. Further, by disclosing
hidden matter or concern that is crucially vital to welfare of the people or society,
whistleblowers present a chance to tackle larger societical apprehensions prior to the
injury is done to the society.47
(h) Contributes in the Socio-Economic Development:-
Whistleblowing is also important for socio-economy development of the
country as the act of blowing the whistle can help to guard against abuse and
undergird the moral and economic efficacy of a society. Further, it also reduces waste

45
Abhimanyu Ghosh, “Open Government and Right to Information”, available at:
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/articles/og.htm. (Visited on March 12, 2016).
46
Available at: http://www.opengovguide.com/topics/whistleblower-protection/ (Visited on June
23, 2015).
47
Transparency International Anti Corruption Resource Centre, Good Practice in Whistleblowing
Protection Legislation (WPL), available at: https://www.u4.no/publications/good-practice-in-
whistleblowing-protection-legislation-wpl/pdf. (Visited on March 27, 2016).

12
and organizational mismanagement and thus promotes responsible and accountable
use of public resources and property.
1.11 Methods of Whistleblowing

When a person comes to know about the illegal activity or corruption in an

organisation, he can choose to disclose the information either internally or externally.
There are many laws which encourage the whistleblowing and provide the procedure
for the same either directly or indirectly. Taking into notice that under which statute
the concern is raised, the methods of whistleblowing can be placed under two
categories48:

(i) The Traditional/Old Methods; and

(ii) The Contemporary/Modern Methods.

(i) The Traditional/ Old Methods:

The traditional methods of whistleblowing are those which are being used by
the citizens of India from the date when there is no specific law dealing with
whistleblowing. Generally, these methods deal with the whistleblowing indirectly.
The traditional methods of whistleblowing can be divided as follows:-

(a) The Constitution of India; and

(b) Other Statutes.

(a) The Constitution of India:-

The Constitution of India provides for the whistleblowing in the shape of
Public Interest Litigation and Writs for the infringement of Fundamental Rights.
These remedies are different to each other in the sense that while through PIL larger
public interest can be protected whereas by availing Writs personal infringement of
Fundamental Rights can be redressed. Now social workers/reformers, lawyers, and
even masses in general knows that if there is any repression, governmental chaos,
violation of Fundamental Rights and administrative deviance then they have the right
to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court and the Court has constitutional authority of
interference in order to minimize their sufferings. The tool through which social

48
Supra note 6.

13
justice and ambitions of the Constitution can be realized by the people of India is
known as “Public Interest Litigation”.49
In the case of Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala50, Justice Dwivedi
observed: “The Constitution of India is not intended to be the arena of legal quibbling
for men with long purses. It is made for the common people. It should generally be so
construed as that they can understand and appreciate it. The more they understand it
the more they love it and the more they prize it. It is really the poor, starved and
mindless millions who need the court’s protection for securing to themselves the
enjoyment of Human Rights.”51
Further Justice Chandrachud also observed: “The Constitution precedents
can’t be allowed to be converted into weapons for crushing the hopes and aspiration
of our half-clad, half starved, and half educated people. These hopes and aspirations
signifying the will of the people can only become expressive through the efforts of
their elected representatives. If they don’t succeed the people, the country must face
the demise and destruction. Then, neither the Court nor the Constitution will save the
country”.52

The instrument of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) together with Writs has been
used in India as the common and efficient method of whistleblowing. In the leading
case of Chairman, Railway Board v. Chandrima Das53 the Apex Court of India
observed as: “when a woman was raped by railway workers in the premises of
railway building and such victim woman filed a writ petition against the government
for compensation then this court has the power to entertain such petition and it is not
right to say that she should have filed a petition in a Civil Court for compensation
and this Court has no jurisdiction in the matter under Article 226 or Article 32 of the
Constitution. Where government officials are associated and the issue is related to the
infringement of Fundamental Rights or the administration of duties towards the

49
Praveen Dalal, “E-Governance: The Best Whistleblower”, available at:
http://www.naavi.org/cl_editorial_04/praveen_dalal/whistle_blower_jan25.htm. (Visited on
March 25, 2016).
50
(1973) 4 SCC 225, p. 460.
51
Praveen Dalal, “Law as an Instrument of Social Change”, available at:
http://www.naavi.org/cl_editorial_04/praveen_dalal/law_jan8.htm#_ftnref2. (Visited on March
23, 2016).
52
Ibid.
53
AIR 2000 SC 988.

14
public, the redress would nevertheless be accessible under the “public law, despite
the fact that a case could be instituted for compensation under the “private law”. It
was highly important in those cases in which there is a breach of Fundamental Right
rather than breach of any ordinary right. In this case, as the petitioner was raped by
employees so this is violation of Fundamental Right ensured by Article 21 of the
Constitution.”54

In the case of Bodhisatwa v. Ms. Subhdra Chakroborty55, the Court held that
“rape” as an offence violates the Fundamental Right of a being enshrined in Article 21
of the Constitution. The Apex Court remarked, “Rape is a crime not only against the
person of a woman but it is also a crime against the entire society. It destroys the
entire psychology of a woman and pushes her into deep emotional crises. Rape is
therefore the most hated crimes. It is crime against basic human rights and is
violative of the victims most cherished right, namely, right to life which includes right
to live with human dignity contained in Article 21”

Thus, the collective force of “Public Interest Litigation (PIL)” and “Public
Law Remedies (Writs)” provides the people of India an effective mode of
whistleblowing which can be called “Constitutional Whistleblowing”.56

(b) Other Statutes:-

The other statutes, i.e., Indian Penal Code, 186057, the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 197358, the Code of Civil Procedure, 190859 etc. also have various

54
Available at: http://lawmantra.co.in/case-brief-bangladeshi-woman-rape-case-the-chairman-
railway-board-ors-vs-mrs-chandrima-das-ors-on-28th-january-2000/. (Visited on March 27.
2016).
55
(1996) 1 SCC 490.
56
Supra note 55.
57
Sections 161 -165, “Offence by Public Servant’, now repealed by the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988). Section 409: Criminal Breach of Trust by Public Servant.
58
Section 22 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, provides for amended Sections 243,
309,317 and 397 of Cr.P.C.1973 for expeditious trials for offence under this Act.
59
Section 91 Public Nuisances:- (1) In the case of a public nuisance or other wrongful act affecting
or likely to affect , the public, a suit for declaration and injunction or for such other relief as may
be appropriate in the circumstances of the case, may be instituted-
(a) By the Advocate – General, or
(b) With the leave of the court, by two or more persons, even though no special damage has been
caused to such persons by reason of such public nuisance or other wrongful act.
(2) Nothing in the Section shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any right of Suit which may
exist independently of its provisions.

15
provisions which is essential for combating civil and criminal offences and
corruption.

(ii) The Contemporary/Modern Methods:-

The contemporary methods of whistleblowing, includes some latest

enactments along with electronic platform which provide the means for lessening
corruption and to advance transparency and accountability in the functioning of
government. These enactments are essential to empower the citizens of the country so
that they can raise their voice, in case they came to know about any wrongdoing.
Thus, these are the enactments which make our democracy functional for the people
in reality. Some of the enactments are – Prevention of Corruption Act, 198860, Right
to Information Act, 200561, the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 200862, the Whistle
Blowers Protection Act, 2014 and the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 201363.

Further in this method, information technology or electronic platform also

plays a major role. It is considered that whistleblowing can be more effective if it is
linked with the information technology because the means of information technology
is not only fast and efficient but also the reliable and secure. It is a well established
fact that the ills of corruption, wrongdoings and frauds etc. take birth and breed
because of the absence of transparency and accountability. These ills can be
eradicated and transparency and accountability can be brought to the system if the
means of information technology in the mode of e-governance is implemented. In
other words, it can be said that the concept of e-governance is helpful in the
development of transparency in administrative actions and lessening of corruption. By

60
Chapter III, Offences and Penalties, Sections 7 to 16.
61
Chapter II, Right to Information and Obligation of Public Authorities, Sections 3 to 11.
62
Section 31, Whistleblowing: (1) The Court or Tribunal may reduce or waive any penalty leviable
against any partner or employee of a limited liability partnership, if it is satisfied that –
(a) Such partner or employee of a limited liability partnership has provided useful information during
investigation of such limited liability partnership; or
(b) When any information given by any partner or employee (whether or not during investigation)
leads to limited liability partnership or any partner or employee of such limited liability
partnership being convicted under this Act or any other Act.
(2) No partner or employee of any limited liability partnership may be discharged, demoted,
suspended, threatened, harassed or in any other manner discriminated against the terms and
conditions of his limited liability partnership or employment merely because of his providing
information or causing information to be provided pursuant to sub-section (1).
63
Chapter VII, Procedure in respect of Complaints, Preliminary inquiry and Investigation, Sections
20-24.

16
using the information technology as a means of whistleblowing, there is less threat to
life that is generally more in other methods of disclosure, thus resulting in easy and
trouble free disclosure of public ills. 64

Thus, the exercise of the means of information technology can protect the
interest of people in a simple and easy way. So, if whistleblowers are to be protected
then it is necessary not to disclose their identities to the person against whom they
have provided the information and simultaneously relevant evidences are also
supplied to the courts so that thorough justice can be done. The use of information
technology in the form of video-conferencing and web-meetings can figure out the
majority of the dilemmas related with the evidence giving. The whistleblowers can
give evidence by using technologies that are easily accessible at the disposition of
courts. It is not a wise thing to disclose the identity of the critical witnesses and
whistleblowers as the retaliatory to tactics can be used by habitual criminals65.

In the end, we can say that this mode of whistleblowing along with e-
governance is competent enough to contribute in the development of free, transparent
and accountable system by eliminating unreasonableness, red-tapism, and corruption
from a society.66.

1.12 Consequences of Whistleblowing

“If you must sin, sin against God, not against the
Bureaucracy. God may forgive you, but the bureaucracy
never will.”

U.S. Admiral Hyman Rickover67

By disclosing information about mal-practices, illegal activities,

whistleblowers have helped save countless lives and countless public money.
However, whistleblowing also involves personal high risk to the concerned
individuals. Whistleblowers may be discharged, prosecuted, threatened, apprehended,
64
Supra note 55.
65
Available at: https://www.apc.org/en/blog/guest-blog-effective-e-governance-safest-whistle-
blower (Visited on March 12, 2016).
66
Supra note 6.
67
K. Ashok Vardhan Shetty, “India Needs a Whistleblowers Protection Act, The Hindu, March 25,
2003, available at: http://www.thehindu.com/op/2003/03/25/stories/2003032500110200.htm.
(Visited on January 11, 2016.

17
or in intense situations, physically attacked or killed as a consequence of
whistleblowing. 68 Whistleblowing is considered a two edged blade because it carries
both positive and negative consequences. A whistleblower is treated as an idol for
bringing positive consequences to the organisation and society; he is also treated as a
traitor because his act of whistleblowing also carries negative consequences to the
organisation and society. Thus, the consequences of whistleblowing can be
summarised into two categories i.e. (i) Positive consequences and (ii) Negative
consequences.

(i) Positive Consequences:

The sense of doing right things and intolerance of misconduct is regarded in

society and the person who owes such qualities is also respected. Such people are
brave, courageous and responsible and live with high moral values and ideologies.
They possess the courage to stand against the misconduct and malpractice.
Their ability to stand against misconduct and malpractice brings positive
consequences to organisation and society at large 69. Some of the positive
consequences are:-
(a) Reduces organisational mismanagement:-
It reduces the organizational mismanagement. Whistleblowing can facilitate
the organization by reporting the unlawful activity to the higher authorities in its
initial stage, so that the responsible officials can take proper action before the
wrongdoing becomes more serious and uncontrollable 70. By reducing organizational
mismanagement, whistleblowing promotes and encourages good governance by
persuading workers to report fraudulent activities being carried out by staff or
superiors to appropriate authority, so set to seek such complaints 71.

68
E.g., several whistleblowers such as Satyendra Dubey, Shanmugam Manjunath, D.K. Ravi have
been killed in recent years. Further in last five years, some 150 whistleblowers have allegedly
been harassed, threatened, or jailed for exposing corruption.
69
Arjumand Bano, Dr. Sanjay Baijal, “ Whistleblowing in India – Introspection, 3 IJETMAS 243
(2015), available at: http://www.ijetmas.com/admin/resources/project/paper/f20150303142
5430684.pdf (Visited on March 12, 2016).
70
Introduction to the Process of Whistleblowing, available at: free-law-essays/employment-
law/introduction-to-the-process-of-whistleblowing-employment-law-essay.php. (Visited on
March 12, 2015).
71
Gaurav Hooda, “Whistleblowing: A Legal & Ethical Connudrum, IJSLR, available at:
http://ail.ac.in/ailresearch/ Whistle-Blowing-A-Legal-Ethical-Connundrum.pdf. (Visited on
January, 23, 2016).

18
(b) Improves employee’s morale:-
It improves the employee’s morale in an organization. When the higher
authorities take action on the basis of information given by the employee then it gives
confidence to the employees that they have ability or power to alter wrong or corrupt
behaviour in the organization72.
(c) Creates healthy working environment:-
It will also create positive and good working environment in the organization.
It promotes organisational values of openness in the workplace.
(d) Beneficial to society:-
It will enhance safety and well being of societal members by disclosing
information. 73 Early alerts can be the means to diminish a potentially larger disaster.
(e) Promotes code of ethics:-
Organisations generally set up ethical standards for employees to follow and
encourage them to perform activities that can meet expectations under these
standards. Codes of ethic show what behaviour organisations intend to promote, and
which actions organisations want to discourage. Building internal channels for
employees to report irregularities is a method for organisations to promote employees
ethics.74 It will also beneficial in developing the moral code of conduct to community.
Whistleblower may be presented as a role model or an idol to the community so that it
will persuade others in the society to embrace ethical behaviour and report
wrongdoings. 75
(f) Increases security of the organisation:-
It raises the security of the organization. When the employees feel that the
person with ethical principles and moral standards is watching them in the
organisation, the chances of wrongdoing decreases and the security of the
organization increases76.

72
Supra note 71.
73
Ibid.
74
Yu Hao Yeh, The Effectiveness of the Whistleblower Protection Under Sarbanes-Oxley Section
806 in Corporate Governance (2014) (Unpublished S.J.D dissertation, University of Kansas),
available at:
https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/9840/Yeh_ku_0099D_11587_DATA_1.pdf;
sequence=1.(Visited on May 19, 2015).
75
Supra note 71.
76
Supra note 70.

19
(ii) Negative Consequences:
Being a whistleblower is not an easy thing as they face numerous
repercussions of their act. There are many negative aspects of whistleblowing, to the
individual, organization and the society. Some of the harmful consequences of
whistleblowing are:-
(a) Retaliation to whistleblowers:-
Whistleblowers often face retaliation from employers when they attempt to
disclose information or try to stop inappropriate actions. The retaliation can be in the
form of intimidation, harassment, reprisal, dismissal, transfer, threatening and in
worst conditions, even death77.
(b) Legal actions against whistleblowers:-
Whistleblowers also have to face legal actions for their revelation of
information. They are charged with falsely charged with criminal or civil allegations
for the disclosure of information. They are charged for the violation of duty of loyalty
and confidentiality. Employers dissuade the employees from making the disclosure of
information on the point that they will initiate defamation proceedings against them if
their information proves wrong. Whistleblowers are often intimidated by superior
officials or other influential personalities as they have enough power to use the court
systems as an efficient mean to quiet the other party.
(c) Creates mistrust within the organisation:-
When information is shared either with subordinates or superiors it always
increases cost and it also creates mistrust within the organisation which leads to affect
output78. Whistleblowing makes people suspicious of one another, which may disrupt
the team spirit and co-operation within the companies. This affects the operations of
company in long run79.
(d) Creates the culture of Spying and Counter Spying in Organisation:-
Whistleblowing creates a culture of spying and counter spying which
demoralizes employees in the organisation80. Nobody knows when and how their

77
Purnima Sehgal, “Whistleblowers: Traitors or Heroes? A Global Perspective” Proceedings of 26 th
International Business Research Conference, UK ,2014, available at:
http://www.wbiworldconpro.com/pages/paper/london-conference-2014/1431. (Visited on April
23, 2016).
78
Supra note 93.
79
Supra note 28.
80
Supra note 93.

20
colleagues will blow the whistle and this unpredictable whistleblowing is a factor that
makes working environments unstable.
(e) Tool to harass employers:-
Whistleblowing may be used as a tool for harassing employer or people and for
settling previous scores81. The employee with greed can misuse the whistleblowing
mechanism for personal benefits. The benefit may be personal grudge, power,
position and money82.
(f) Costs of Whistleblowing:-
Another negative consequence of whistleblowing to the society is that it costs
court congestion and delays the process of speedy delivery of justice. Thus, the
society has to bear the burden of whistleblowing, for example, cases which are not of
serious nature and don’t need immediate actions can restrict the courts from
entertaining those cases which are of more crucial or substantial nature.83

Although whistleblowing has both positive and negative consequences, but

still positive consequences overweighs the negative consequences. Since it results in
more benefits to the institution and society at large than the harm or cost to the
organisation and society so it is necessary and desirable to support and encourage
whistleblowing.

1.13 Employee’s duty of Loyalty and Confidentiality vis-a-vis their right to

report wrongdoings

While many laws encourage or facilitate whistleblowing, there are also legal
obligations that mandate confidentiality or non disclosure, conflicting with
whistleblowing norms. Confidentiality mandates can be found in contracts (e.g. non-
disclosure agreements), professional rules (e.g. lawyers’ obligation of confidentiality)
etc. There is often conflict between employee’s duty of faithfulness and
confidentiality and their right to report wrongdoing. It is often questioned that in case
of conflict between these two legal norm, i.e. whistleblowing and confidentiality
which will prevail. There is no single response on this subject. To conclude whether

81
Ibid.
82
Supra note 96.
83
Supra note 92.

21
someone who is subject to a confidentiality mandate may nonetheless engage in
whistleblowing, one must carefully examine the specific legal and factual context 84.

Every employee has a general duty of loyalty and confidentiality towards his
employer or institution. As a general proposition, a worker is subject to a duty of
loyalty and confidentiality and any information collected by the employee throughout
the duration of his employment is subject to confidentiality. However, there are some
certain situations where a worker’s duty of loyalty can be abrogated. There is a long
recognised exception in case of corruption. In the case of Gartiside v. Outram,85the
plaintiff pleaded to restrict an ex-employee from revealing materials concerning
plaintiff’s business. The defendant in reply argued that since the petitioner had used
deceitful means in his business so he has the right to inform the authorities about the
same.86 While delivering the judgement, the Vice Chancellor Wood ruled that:

“The true doctrine is that there is no confidence as to the disclosure of

inequity. You can’t make me the confidant of a crime or a fraud, and be entitled to
close up my lips upon any secret which you have the audacity do disclose to me
relating to any fraudulent intention on your part.”

He further referred to the Irish case of Annesley v. the Earl of Anglesea,87and

approved the words of counsel in that case:

“…no personal commitments can discharge every member of society with that
universal obligation under which they are duty bound to discover every plan which
may be formed, against the laws of the country, to impair the public wellbeing.”88

Further, Robert A. Larmer describes the standard view of whistleblowing by

explaining that employees possess prima facie duties of loyalty and confidentiality to
their employer and whistleblowing can’t be justified except on the basis of a higher
duty to the public good.89

84
Supra note 27.
85
26L.J.Ch (N.S.) 113, (1857).
86
Kaaren Koomen, “Breach of Confidence and the Public Interest Defence: Is it in the Public
Interest?”, QUTLJ 57, available at: https://lr.law.qut.edu.au/article/download/382/371. (Visited
on April 12, 2016).
87
17.How. State Trials, 1139.
88
Ibid.
89
Robert A. Larmer, “Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty” 11 JoBE 125 (1992).

22
 Thus, any bona fide disclosure made by the employee which is beneficial to
the society at large is not a violation of duty of loyalty and confidentiality.

In the case of Grigoridas v. Greece90 the European Court of Human Rights

(ECtHR) ruled that any revelation of confidential information should be defended if it
serves the public interest under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR)91, subject to a precondition of proportionality. In the first instance, the
employee should unveil the concerns to a superior or other competent authority.
Where that course of action was impracticable, the information could, as a last resort,
if no other course is possible, be disclosed to the public. Before doing so, the
employee must confirm as far as possible that the information was accurate and
reliable. Under the test of proportionality, a Court should also consider the motive of
the reporting employee and whether the harm gone through as a consequence of
disclosure of information overcomes the public interest in knowing the truth.

Further in the case of Guja v. Moldova92, a media officer in the Prosecutor

General’s Office was fired for disclosing confidential material to the media that
strongly suggested improper ministerial interference in criminal trial against four
police officers. The European Court of Human Rights stressed that employees,
especially civil servants who have access to sensitive information, normally owe a
duty of loyalty to their employers. Nevertheless, if there was a strong public interest,
revelation of confidential information should be protected. Thus, in this case the
dismissal was unjustified. The European Court of Human Rights observed that:

“Since the duty of civil servants in a democratic society is to help the

government in performing its functions and since the public has a right to anticipate

90
1993 ECHR 93 ( ECtHR).
91
Article 10 – Freedom of Expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions
and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and
regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of
broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject
to such formalities, conditions, restriction or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary
in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety,
for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of
reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence,
or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
92
2008 ECHR 14277/04.

23
that they will assist and not act against the democratically elected government, the
duty of loyalty and reserve assumes special significance for them...... In addition, in
view of the very nature of their position, civil servants often have access to
information which the government, for a variety of valid grounds, may have an
interest in keeping confidential or secret. Therefore, the duty of prudence owed by
civil servants will also generally be a strong one.... In this respect the Court opines
that a civil servant, in the course of his job, may become aware of in-house
information, including secret information, whose dissemination or publication
corresponds to a strong public interest. The Court thus believes that the reporting by
a civil servant or an employee in the public sector of illegal conduct or wrongdoing in
the department should, in certain circumstances, enjoy protection.93”

In another case, Heinisch v. Germany94, the complainant, a geriatric nurse in a

nursing home, collectively with other staff constantly pointed out to top officials that
the shortage of staff were impacting on their ability to carry out their duties and so
caused severe deficiencies in the daily care of patients. Later, she was fired by the
employer without any intimation on the basis that she filed a complaint against her
employer. The German Court upheld her dismissal but she made an appeal before
European Court of Human Rights. The Court applied the test of proportionality. The
Court observed that the complainant had reacted bona fide and had raised her
concerns on numerous occasions with her employer to no avail. The Court further
held that the interest of public in getting info about the care in nursing home overrode
the rights of the employer and the dismissal of the applicant was “disproportionately
severe”. Accordingly, it was a violation of Article 10 of European Convention on
Human Rights which deals with the freedom of expression.

Most recently, in Rubins v. Lativa95, the applicant was the chairperson of one
of the institution of Riga Stardina University, which is a State university. The
university took the decision to merge this department with another department. He
was also informed about the same with a notice that if he refused, his employment

93
Available at: http://ijc.md/Publicatii/mlu/ECHR/guja.pdf (Visited on 3 July 2015).
94
Application No. 28274/08, ECtHR, 21 July, 2014, available at: http://www.ier.org.uk/blog/
article-10-right-freedom-expression-whistleblowing (Visited on March 21, 2016).
95
Application No. 79040/12, ECtHR, 13 January, 2015.

24
with the university would be terminated. He criticised the decision taken by the
university as there is lack of democracy and accountability in the leadership of the
organisation. He also drew the recipient’s attention to the alleged mismanagement of
the university’s finances. As a result, he was dismissed. He made a complaint and
argued that his discharge was against the provision of Article 10 of the Convention,
since he had been punished for exercising a legitimate opinion about problems
prevailing in the university and for attempting to resolve his employment situation.
The Court applied the principles stated in Grigoridas v. Greece96 and held that the
dismissal of the applicant was in contravention of Article 10 of the Convention.

Thus, it is now a well established principle that though a public servant has a
duty of loyalty and confidentiality but this duty is not absolute. He is not duty bound
to remain silent when he witnesses corruption or wrongdoing of any other public
servant. General public has a right to know about the conduct of public officials and
by revealing corruption or mal-administration the public interest is better served. The
Whistleblowers laws are founded on this principle. 97 However, absence of laws,
inadequate protection under the laws, and fail to enforce whistleblowing policies
create a trouble for those persons who witnessed wrongdoing. Even in those countries
where specific laws exists which lay down that employees have a right to report is
subject to many exceptions, e.g. in most of the countries matters of national security
can’t be publicly disclosed. 98

1.14 Distinction between Whistleblowing and Complaint:-

Whistleblowing is not the same as complaint. Whistleblowing is to be
distinguished from complaint. In most instances complaints involve personal subject
matter of the complainant than with others or public interest. When someone makes
complaint, he is alleging that he has personally affected by the illegality. The person
making the complaint i.e., the complainant is personally interested in the result of the
complaint and he has to prove his complaint. Whereas the whistleblowing is
concerned with subject matter affecting public interest. In most of the cases of

96
1993 ECtHR 93.
97
Law Commission of India, 179th Report on The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of
Informers (December, 2001), available at: http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/
179rptp1.pdf. (Visited on July 21, 2015).
98
Ibid.

25
whistleblowing, the whistleblower is not personally affected by the wrongdoing or
illegality. He is not expected to prove the malpractice or illegality99. The difference
between whistleblowing and complaint can be summarised as follows:-
(a) A complaint is generally made by an individual who feels that he has been
personally wronged or treated poorly by employer or organisation. This can be
breach of his individual employment rights etc. However, in whistleblowing
the complainant is not personally affected. He only highlights a thing or act of
others which may have adverse effect on the interest of general public. It is the
act of escalating a genuine concern about the well being and safety of at least
one individual. 100
(b) A complaint is often made by someone who has vested interest in the issue at
hand- as it is the complainant himself who has been treated incorrectly or who
faced illegality etc. Consequently, the complainant has to prove his case.
However, in whistleblowing the individual reports a matter pertaining to
wrongdoing or irregularity that touches others i.e., general public. The
whistleblower is generally not disturbed in person by wrongdoing so he has no
personal interest in the result of his raised matter. His motive is only to alert
others before the situation gets worse. Consequently, the whistleblower should
not be supposed to establish the case or allegation. He is a person who
discloses the wrongdoing or corruption so that others having authority can
deal with it.101
1.15 Difference Between Whistleblowers and Informers/Snitchers

The phrase whistleblower is often puzzled with the term informers having
poor repute and popularly acknowledged as “Mukhbir”. They often used as synonyms
for each other. However, there is a real difference between whistleblowers and
informers/ snitchers.

99
Siddharth G. Das, Regina Aldrin, “ Whistleblowing and Competitive Advantage”, 4 SCMSJIM 70
(2007), available at: http://www.scmsgroup.org/scmsjim/pdf/2007/scms%20journal%20april-
june%202007.pdf (Visited on March 25, 2016).
100
Available at: www.wordsworthreading.co.uk/.../What%20is%20the%20difference%20between%
20... (Visited on March 12, 2016).
101
Ibid.

26
(a) The term ‘whistleblower’ has a positive connotation. Whistleblowers are
conscientious activists who bring the wrongdoings to the attention of proper
authorities or public. Since they disclose the wrongdoing not for the personal
benefits but for the advantage of society at large, they are greeted as heroes or
patriots. But, on the other hand, the terms ‘informers’ or ‘snitcher’ have a
negative connotation as they disclose the wrongdoings for money or for some
other personal gain. 102
(b) Another difference between the two is on the point of legal responsibility of
the individual revealing the information. Informers or snitchers are generally
themselves a part of the corrupt practice and disclose the information with a
motive that it will lower their liability. But whistleblowers are not involved in
any wrongdoings and thus there is no question of being held them liable 103.
(c) Whistleblowers typically have far more to lose than to gain; whereas
snitches/informers typically have far more to gain than to lose. Whistleblowers
often have to face severe consequences for their act of revealing information.
They put their life in danger in order to safeguard public interest. They put
their jobs in jeopardy. They are harassed both mentally and physically a lot.
But in case of informers, they only disclose wrongdoing for some personal
gain or to reduce their liability.
(d) The basic motive of whistleblowers disclosing the information is public good
and to cleanse the organisation. While in case of Informers, they disclose the
information for any ulterior or selfish motive.
1.16 Difference between Whistleblower protection and witness protection

The difference between whistleblower protection and witness protection is

summarized in Article 33 of United Nations Convention against Corruption
(UNCAC)104, specific to reporting persons, is aimed to include those persons who

102
Dr. Albert P’ Rayan, Whistle Blowers are Not Just Informers or Stoolies, The New Indian
Express, Feb. 2, 2015, available at: http://www.newindianexpress.com/education/edex/Whistle-
Blowers-are-Not-Just-Informers-or-Stoolies/2015/02/02/article2643136.ece. (Visited on March 5,
2016).
103
Karen Kramer, “Witness Protection as a Key Tool in Addressing Serious and Organized Crime,
available at: http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/PDF_GG4_Seminar/Fourth_GGSeminar_P3-
19.pdf. (Visited on April 23, 2016).
104
Article 33 Protection of Reporting Persons: - Each State party shall consider incorporating into its
domestic legal system appropriate measure to provide protection against any unjustified treatment

27
may have information which is not of such nature to make up evidence in the legal
sense. This provides that the Member Nations are expected to provide security in
every case and not only in that case in which the individual testifies as a witness or
expert in legal proceeding and therefore meet the characteristics for witness
protection. The term “witness” is not defined in the United Nations Convention
against Corruption105 but Article 32 of the Convention lays down that the witness
includes only those persons who give testimony relating to offences provided in the
Convention. 106

Although the differences between the terms are clear, there is potential overlap
between whistleblowers and witnesses as sometimes whistleblowers may have
substantial evidence and eventually take part as witnesses in the case. When a
whistleblower becomes a witness during court proceedings he can be protected under
witness protection laws. However, in cases, where the information given by
whistleblower does not result into criminal proceedings or the whistleblower is never
called as a witness, then whistleblower will not be protected under the witness
protection laws. Given that whistleblowers are usually employees of the organisation
where the reported misconduct took place, they may face specific risks that are
normally not covered by witness protection laws, such as demotion, transfer or
dismissal. Furthermore, they may need damages for loss of the salary and jobs etc.
Therefore, witness protection laws are insufficient to protect whistleblowers. 107

There is again some overlap between the two on the assurance of keeping the
identity of person secret. However, witness protection is a considerable solemn issue
than the whistleblower protection, involving generally the corporeal protection of the
person who may not give evidence in a criminal case except protection is offered to

for any person who reports in good faith and on reasonable grounds to the competent authorities
any facts concerning offences established in accordance with this Convention, available at:
105
Article 32 Protection of Witnesses, Experts and Victims:- (1) Each State Party shall take
appropriate measures in accordance with its domestic legal system and within its means to
provide effective protection from potential retaliation or intimidation for witnesses and experts
who give testimony concerning offences established in accordance with this Convention, and, as
appropriate, for their relatives and other persons close to them.
106
Transparency International, Whistleblower Protection and the UN Convention Against
Corruption, 2013, available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents
/libe/dv/ti_report_/ti_report_en.pdf. (Visited on July 29, 2015).
107
OECD (2016), Committing to Effective Whistleblower Protection, OCED Publishing, Paris,
available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264252639.en.(Visited on February 24, 2016).

28
them.108 It can also be wider in extent, including individuals who are not the
employees of the organisation and might have solely noticed something or discovered
the info they are commanded to give evidence. Whistleblowing generally should not
injure the career and interest of the person at the place of work. Since whistleblower is
not directly or personally affected by the wrongdoing or irregularity so he has no
private interest in the conclusion of any investigation or inquiry. Thus whistleblowers
are not supposed to establish the wrongdoing or mal-practice. They have limited role
to play. After providing the information, they are only spectators of the proceedings.
Thus, in whistleblowing the information given by the person is more important than
the person himself. Generally, they are not asked to be witnesses but are simply
spectators once the wrongdoing is disclosed.109

1.17 Whistleblowing: A Constitutional Perspective

The constitutionality of whistleblowing or whistleblowers action often

challenged on the ground that it breaches the employee’s duty of loyalty and
confidentiality which he have in respect of his employer and further also encroaching
Fundamental Right to privacy of the employer. The Constitution of India lays down
means of whistleblowing in the shape of PIL (Public Interest Litigation) and in case of
violation of Fundamental Rights it also provides for ‘public law remedy’. In the
former case the interest of the public is protected by the act of whistleblowing and in
the latter case Constitutional remedies in the form of Writs are invoked to redress
personal infringement of Fundamental Rights.110

Since the Constitution of India legitimizes the actions of the whistleblowers,

there should be adequate laws to safeguard them. 111 In the case of Central Bureau of
Investigation v. Vidya Dhar & Anothers112 (JBT teachers’ recruitment scam) 113, the

108
UNDCP Model Witness Protection Bill, 2000, available at: http://www.unodc.org/pdf/lap-
witness-protection-2000.pdf . (Visited on Feb.20, 2015).
109
Supra note 42.
110
Upendra Baxi,” Taking Suffering Seriously: Social Action Litigation in the Supreme Court of
India” 4 TWLS 108 (1985), available at: http://scholar.valpo.edu/twls/vol4/iss1/6 (Visited on July
21, 2015).
111
Ruchica, “Constitutional Justification of Whistleblowers’s Action” 2 IJARMSS 178 (2013),
available at: http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Nov2013/17.pdf , (Visited on 29 April, 2015).
112
CC no. 37/2010.
113
Available at: https://dkmahant.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/recruitment-scam-ruling.pdf. (Visited
on July 10, 2016).

29
Special CBI Judge Vinod Kumar suggested principles to govern law for safeguarding
the whistleblowers in the absence of legislation to protect them. The court while
deciding the question of sentencing Sanjiv Kumar114 (Director of Primary Education
in Haryana) observed that it is only due to the step taken by Sanjiv Kumar i.e.,
furnishing the award list to the Court that this scam is exposed.115 The court ruled that
in the lack of any legislation for the protection of whistleblowers, the following
principles may govern them:

1. Law welcomes whistleblowers.

2. If the whistleblower is not guilty but only was a victim of circumstances, he
must be presented as a prosecution witness.
3. If whistleblower has taken part in the commission/ conspiracy of the
commission of the crime, but his role is trivial in nature then the court should
come forward and try to make him ‘approver’.
4. If the whistleblower had played a considerable part in the commission of such
offence, he must reveal whole facts before the investigating officer and during
trial he must testify on oath and should unveil the truth only. The court in such
case must certify in its judgement about the fact that such whistleblower had
revealed the whole truth and has not concealed anything from this court.
5. Where the court certifies the fact in its judgement, then it can award least
possible sentence to such convict and if possible, may release him on
probation with a proposal to the government that no departmental action
should be initiated against him in view of the said conviction.

The Delhi High Court in the case of Shri Bhardwaj Media Pvt. Ltd v. State116
ruled that in order to control corruption, there is an urgent requirement to afford
protection to individuals who expose corruption. The Court ruled that when
corruption is revealed, it provides a chance to agencies to initiate proceeding against
those who take part in such corrupt activity and to mop its stables. However, if the

114
Sanjiv Kumar had initially exposed the scam with a plea in the Supreme Court but was also found
to be involved in it during the CBI probe.
115
Smriti Singh, “Recruitment Scam: Sack illegally hired teachers, court says, the Times of India,
Jan. 23, 2013, available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Recruitment-scam-Sack-
illegally-hired-teachers-court-says/articleshow/18142529.cms. (Visited on July 12, 2016).
116
2007 X AD (DEL.) 561.

30
authorities initiate proceeding against those who reveal corruption in place to be
grateful to them, then corruption is bound to grow day and night.117

In S.P. Gupta v. Union of India118, the Supreme Court of India held that if
confidentiality were to be followed in the activities of government and the practices of
government were to be maintained concealed from public examination, it would
support and encourage injustice, corruption and misuse or abuse of power. But if there
is a free and fair government with right to have information about the working of
government then it would guarantee the people of a healthier and more competent
government. It can be said without any disbelief that disclosure to public examination
and analysis is one of the assured methods of attaining a fair and competent
government.119

The whistleblowing acquires its legality under the following Articles of the Indian
Constitution:-

(i) Freedom of Information under Article 19(1)(a):

Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution ensures to all citizens “the right to
freedom of speech and expression”. Clause (2) of Article 19 simultaneously provides:
“Nothing in sub-clause (a) of Clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law
or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as, such law imposes reasonable
restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests
of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations
with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of
court, defamation or incitement to an offence.”
The right of information is indisputably a fundamental right, a species of
freedom of speech and expression120. It is also an indivisible part of the democracy.
One can’t imagine the democracy without having right of information. Citizens must
have the right to take part in the functioning of the democratic process of the country
and in order to take part in the affairs of the country it is necessary to provide
information to the citizens on every issues in which they have interest. Imperfect

117
Available at: http://www.neerajaarora.com/blowing-the-whistle/. (Visited on June 12, 2016)
118
AIR 1982 SC 149.
119
Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1294854/. (Visited on June 1, 2016).
120
State of U.P. v. Raj Narayan, AIR 1975 SC 865; P.V. Narsimha Rao v. State, AIR 1998 SC 2120.

31
information, incorrect information and no-information all evenly produce uninformed
citizens, which makes democracy a parody. Therefore right to have adequate and
complete information is a part and parcel of the right of the citizens under Article
19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain121, the Apex Court has underlined the
significance of right to know under Article 19(1)(a) in a democracy as follows:-
“In a government of responsibility like ours, it is elementary that citizens
ought to know what their government is doing. They have the right to know every
public act, everything that is done in a public way, by their public functionaries. The
right to know, which is emanated from the concept of freedom of speech, though not
absolute, is a factor which should make one careful, when secrecy is claimed for
transactions by the public functionaries. The responsibility of officials to clarify and
legitimize their acts is the main safeguard against injustice and corruption.”122
The Supreme Court in Shri Dinesh Trivedi, M .P. and Others v. Union of
India123 recognised that citizen’s right to know emanates from right to freedom of
speech and expression. The Court ruled:-
“In modern constitutional democracies, it is obvious that citizens have a right
to know about the functioning of the government which have been elected by them. In
order to ensure their participation in the democratic process, it is important to keep
them informed of the critical decisions taken by the government and the basis
thereof.”124
In another case, Indian Soaps and Toiletries Makers Association v. Ozair
Hussain125, the Apex Court ruled that Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees
a citizen the right to receive information. The right has its origin from freedom of
speech and expression enclosed in the Article 19(1)(a). However, this right is not
absolute and it can be limited by reasonable restriction as provided in Article 19(2).
Further, it is obligatory for the State to ensure the availability of the right to receive
information, but such information can be given to the extent it is available and
possible, without affecting the Fundamental Rights of others.

121
AIR 1975 SC 865.
122
Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/438670/. (Visited on July 12, 2016).
123
(1997) 4 SCC 306.
124
Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/716836/. (Visited on April 23, 2016).
125
(2013) 3 SCC 641.

32
 It is hence evident that the Apex Court in India has recognised the right to
know or obtain information as a part of Fundamental Right of Freedom of Speech and
Expression enshrined under Article 19 (1) (a), subject to reasonable limitations
provided in Article 19 (2). Further, in order to give right to every citizen to have
access to official information and promote openness, transparency and accountability
in government, the Freedom of Information Act, 2002, has been passed. The Act lays
down for furnishing information by the Public Information Officer, on request from
the person willing of obtaining it, on payment of the prescribed fee.

(ii) Right to Know/ Right to be Informed under Article 21:

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution contains right to life and personal liberty.
Article 21 provides that “No person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty
except according to the procedure established by law”. The term life’ includes all
those aspects of life which are necessary for quality life. The right to life and personal
liberty embraces multiplicity of rights.126 In Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd v.
Proprietors Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt. Ltd.127, the Supreme Court
held that if democracy had to work efficiently, people must have the right to know
about the proceedings or functions of the government. The Court further stated that it
must be remembered that general public have a right to know so that they can actively
participate in the functioning of the democracy. The Court ruled that the right to know
is a fundamental right, to which citizens of this nation desire, in the broad scope of the
right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. 128

In Essar Oil Ltd v. Halar Utkarsh Samiti129, the Supreme Court said that
there was a powerful relationship between Article 21 and Right to know, mainly
where undisclosed government decisions may have an effect on wellbeing, life and
employment of individuals.

Further, in the case of Income Tax Practitioner’s Association v. R.K. Jain130,

the Apex Court accepted whistleblowing as a justifiable activity, necessary for
democracy that is build by the rule of law, as follows:-

126
Available at: http://india.indymedia.org/en/2005/10/210975.shtml (Visited on March 3, 2016).
127
AIR 1989 SC 190.
128
Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1351834/. (Visited on March 13, 2017).
129
(2004) 2 SCC 392.
130
(2010) 8 SCC 281.

33
 “At this stage, there is a growing acceptance of phenomenon of whistleblower.
A whistleblower is a person who raises a concern about wrongdoing occurring in an
organisation or institution. Generally this person would be from that same
organisation. The exposed misconduct may be a violation of a law, rule, regulation
and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as, fraud, health, safety violations and
corruption. Whistleblowers may raise their voice internally (e.g. to other people
within the accused organisation) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement
agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues). Most whistleblowers
are internal whistleblowers, who report misconduct on a co-worker or superior
within their organisation. External whistleblowers report wrongdoing on outside
persons or agencies i.e., lawyers, the media, law enforcement or watchdog agencies,
or other local, state, or federal agencies. An individual can be described as a
whistleblower who has tried to highlight the irregularity or unlawful activity of an
imperative institution established by the state and such individual should not be
silenced by invoking Articles 129 or 215 of the Constitution.”131

After examining the Constitutional provisions and various judgements given

by Supreme Court, the actions of whistleblowers can be legitimized. Articles 19 and
21 of the Constitution justify the action of whistleblowers. Since the whistleblowing
is justifiable by the Constitution so there should be adequate lawful safeguards to the
whistleblowers. In the end, it can be safely concluded that a legislation empowering
persons to report the wrongdoing and further protecting such persons is absolutely
legitimate and is in conformity with the right to privacy originating from Article 19
(1) (a) of the Constitution. The right to privacy has to be appropriately harmonized
against the right to know/right to receive information as both the rights have their
origin from Article 19(1) (a).132

1.18 PROBLEM PROFILE

Corruption is a problem of almost all the countries in the world which has the
impact of weakening governance both in public and private sector. In the fight against
corruption, whistleblowers play an important role. But the sphere of whistleblowing is

131
Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/958740/. (Visited on March 23, 2016).
132
Supra note 98.

34
still in the phase of infancy. Many International agreements and conventions on anti-
corruption provide that nations should adopt comprehensive laws for the protection of
whistleblowers. However, only a small number of nations have dedicated laws for
whistleblowers protection and even in those countries, there exist ambiguity,
uncertainty and absence of effective enforcing machinery.

Whistleblowers protection in India, so far, has been profoundly poor as there

was no law till 2014 (before the passing of Whistleblowers Protection Act, 2014)
which specifically provides the protection to whistleblowers. In India, there are many
laws which provide for the eradication of corruption in public sector and their
reporting to the competent authorities under those laws, such as, the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988, the Right to Information Act, 2005, The Lokpal and Lokayukta
Act, 2013. But the individuals often feel unsafe or they are often intimidated for
blowing the whistle, (reporting the corruption) in the absence of specific legal
protection. The Whistleblowers Act, 2014 provides such protection to those
individuals who disclose information of any corrupt or illegal or unethical conduct.
However, the Act is recently passed by Parliament, contains many drawbacks. One
the most important drawback of this Act is that it only applies to public sector and has
no application in private sector and even the rules required for implementation the law
is still not framed by the government, rendering the provisions useless.

1.19 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The sphere of whistleblowing is yet in a phase of early life. Only a small

number of nations have comprehensive laws dealing with whistleblowers protection
and even there exists ambiguity, loopholes or there is absence of adequate law
enforcing machinery. The literature on this particular topic is limited. Most of the
available literature includes laws passed by India and abroad, books on Indian
Evidence Act, and whistleblowing, various articles published in journals. Some of the
literature has been referred and gone through is as follows:

1. All literature on whistleblowing traces the activity in an organisational context

to 1971, when at a conference, consumer activist Ralph Nader raised the issue
as a ‘call for responsibility’ and an encouragement to blow the whistle’
defined whistleblowing as:

35
 “an act of a man or woman who, believing that the public interest overrides
the interest of the organisation he serves, blows the whistle that the
organisation is involved in corrupt, illegal, fraudulent or harmful activity.” 133
2. The article which is reviewed by the researcher is – Whistleblowers Laws:
International Best Practice, by Paul Latimer and A J Brown134. This article
provides a detailed overview about the considerations that need to be kept in
mind while drafting a whistleblower protection law. The article also explains
whether whistleblowers are heroes or traitors. It also explains the pre-
requisites for whistleblowers laws and analysis the whistleblower protection
laws of different countries. The article concludes that effective whistleblower
protection must include comprehensive whistleblower protection law and thus
effective legislation is the backbone of any proposed whistleblower protection.
3. Another article reviewed by the researcher is – Whistleblowing: International
Standards and Developments by David Banisar 135. This article discusses the
various definitions of whistleblowing and brings out the notion of
whistleblowing as an element of free speech and the right of individuals to
express dissent. It further discusses the utility of whistleblowing and the
barriers to the same. The article further discussed the various international
conventions that relate to protection of whitleblowing. The article also
analysis the national laws on whistleblowing from USA, New Zealand,
Canada and South Africa.
4. The paper which is reviewed by the researcher is – An Overview of
Whistleblowing: Indian Perspective by Nimisha Bhargava, Dr. Mani K.
Madala136. This paper deals with aspects like (a) Whistleblowing Process, (b)
Consequences of Whistleblowing, (c) Need for building a whistleblower
policy, (d) Recommendations for India to encourage whistleblowing. In
Whistleblowing process the researcher has stated that Keenan and McLain

133
Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower (Visited on Nov.29, 2015).
134
Paul Latimer and A J Brown, “Whistleblowers Laws: International Best Practice” 31 UNSW 766
(2008), available at: http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/40_latimer_
and_brown_2008.pdf (Visited on March 14, 2015).
135
Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1753180 (Visited on March 05,
2015).
136
Available at: www.ijirset.com/upload/2015/february/ 71_An.pdf. (Visited on March 15, 2015).

36
 (1992)137 developed a thorough model that comprises of seven stages which
states that the practice of whistleblowing is initiated by (i) an individual’s
alertness of the misconduct due to his/her formal or informal responsibilities
in the organisations; (ii) Further, the observer must evaluate the gravity of the
wrongdoing; (iii) stabilise his/her inspirations to take action; (iv) the
succeeding phase includes the evaluation of the observer’s effect over the
situation which may result in (v) hunting for others who have the capability to
stop the misconduct, i.e. selecting to whom the disclosure should be made (vi)
finally, an individual must consider the outcomes of his/her action for self, for
others and for the unlawful behaviour being questioned (vii) As a
consequence, there may be four courses of action, namely: silence, procedural
reporting through recommended channels, non procedural reporting, or direct
interference.
5. The researcher also studied the book “Business Ethics : An Indian
Perspective” by A.C. Fernando 138. In Part II, Chapter 12 which deals with
Role of Various Agencies in Ensuring Ethics in Corporations, the author
explained – What is whistleblowing, Role of Whistleblowing and why should
it be protected? Whistleblowing involves a conflict between two competing
duties, to protect the public and be loyal to the organisation. But then given the
fact often there exists no mechanism to deal effectively with ethical concerns,
someone who is in the horn of an ethical dilemma has a “3 way choice; shut
up (and take a hard knock on your conscience); get out (on the grounds of
conflicting values); or blow the whistle (and pay for the heavy
consequences)”. A whistleblower may be generally a worker either in a public
sector organisation or a private sector company who goes to the designed
authority with complaints of corruption or mismanagement in the organisation
with a view to mitigating the evil. Whistleblowing is a method that brings to
open the unethical practices in corporations. It is justified because persons

137
J. Keenan, and D. Mclain, “Whistleblowing: A Conceptualization and Model,” 10, AMBPP 350
(1992).
138
A. C. Fernando : “Business Ethics: An India Perspective, available at: http://books.google.co.in/
books?id=A-k_uWkGCEUC&pg=PA323&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false .
(Visited on March 10, 2015).

37
 who are aware that grave error/ injustice is committed in their workplace, and
yet remain mute witnesses to protect their job/personal interest become
accomplices in such acts.
6. Another article which is reviewed by the researcher is – “Good Practice in
Whistleblowing Protection Legislation (WPL) by Marie Chene 139. The article
provides the information regarding why does whistleblowing protection
matters and objectives of whistleblowing protection legislation. The article
also discusses the issue whose disclosure is to be protected. Whether it should
be restricted to employees or it should also extend to external persons. It also
relates to the issue to the treatment of anonymous whistleblowers disclosure.
Further, the article provides the disclosure procedure and nature and extend of
protection.
7. The article which is reviewed by the researcher is – “International Principles
for Whistleblower Legislation” 140. In order to ensure proper protection to
whistleblowers, this article has presented principles which serve as guidance
for formulating new and improving existing whistleblower legislation. The
article provides the scope of application of whistleblowing and protection to
the whistleblower, disclosure procedures, legislative structure and its
enforcement.
8. Another article which is reviewed by the researcher is – “Whistleblowing – An
Employer’s Guide to Global Compliance” 141. This article provides the
summary of the key legislative provisions regulating whistleblowing in the
selected countries under the heading ‘The Legislative Framework:
Whistleblower Protections across the Globe’. Further, this article provides that
there is a strong cultural element which influences how different jurisdictions
respond to whistleblowers.
9. The article which is reviewed by the researcher is – “Whistle Blowing in
India-Introspection” by Arjumand Bano 142. The article deals with the concept

139
Available at: www.u4.no/publications/good-practice...whistleblowing-protection.../40..., (Visited
on April 12, 2015).
140
Available at: http://issuu.com/transparencyinternational/docs/2013_whistleblowerprinciples_en
(Visited on April 27, 2015).
141
Available at: http://www.dlapiperuknow.com/export/sites/uknow/products/files/uknow/DLA-
Piper-Whistleblowing-Report.pdf (Visited on June 20, 2015).
142
Available at: http://www.ijetmas.com/admin/resources/project/paper/f201503031425430684.pdf
(Visited on October 12, 2015).

38
 and importance of whistleblowing in an organisation. Further, the article
highlights the status of whistleblowers in Indian scenario and throws light on
miserable treatment of whistleblowers. It also tries to inculcate some of the
suggested remedies in whistleblower protection program to safeguard the
position of whistleblower.
10. Another article reviewed by the researcher is – “Whistleblowers- The New
Custodian for the Corporate”143 by Divya Mehta and Sonal Babbar. The article
copes with the concern of whistleblowing in the organisations, the role of
whistleblower. It examines why employees have been reluctant to blow the
whistle and goes on to suggest how effective internal whistleblowing is a tool
for good corporate governance.

1.20 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

The research work shall be based on the following hypothesis:-

1. Providing adequate protection to whistleblowers will lead to good governance

and transparency in system.
2. Protection under Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014 is not much
encouraging for whistleblowers.

1.21 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this thesis are as followings:

(a) To study the concept of whistleblowing and various laws dealing with
whistleblowing.
(b) To study the protection available to whistleblowers in public and private
sector and critically analysis of the provisions of the Whistleblower Protection
Act, 2014.
(c) To make a comparative study of whistleblowers protection among various
nations.
(d) To make recommendations for improvement and strengthening the
whistleblowers protection in India.

143
Divya Mehta, Sonal Babbar, “Whistleblowers – The New Custodians for the Corporate, 3, IJIRS,
450 (2014), available at: http://www.ijirs.com/vol3_issue-3/34.pdf (Visited on October 23, 2015).

39
1.22 RESEARCH METHOD

For the purpose of this research both doctrinal and non-doctrinal method of
research will be followed. The doctrinal mode of research includes both primary and
secondary sources. The primary source includes study of international instruments,
The Constitution and Acts, various reports and judgements of Courts. The secondary
source will be journals, books, articles, newspapers. Relevant literature from the
internet will also be taken into note. In the non-doctrinal method of research, material
and data shall be collected on the basis of structured and unstructured interviews and
questionnaires conducted in the state of Haryana.

1.23 CHAPTERIZATION

 CHAPTER 1. Introduction
 CHAPTER 2. Whistleblowers Protection: Historical Aspect
 CHAPTER 3. Whistleblowers Protection: International Legal Perspective
 CHAPTER 4. Whistleblowers Protection: Indian Legal Perspective
 CHAPTER 5. Corporate Good Governance and Whistleblowing in India
 CHAPTER 6. Whistleblowers Protection Legislation-A comparative study
 CHAPTER 7. Whistleblowing Laws and its impact in the State of Haryana- An
Empirical Study
 CHAPTER 8. Conclusion and Suggestions

40