Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/131889
Type of publication: master thesis
Field of Science: Teisė / Law (S001)
Author(s): Patackas, Gajus
Supervisor: Žurauskaitė, Evelina
Title: “Whistleblowing”: asmenų, pranešančių apie teisės pažeidimus, apsauga darbo santykiuose
Other Title: Whistleblowing. Protection of whistleblowers at employment relationship
Extent: 48 p.
Date: 10-Jun-2021
Keywords: Direktyva;Directive;Pranešėjų apsauga;Protection of whistleblowers;Neigiamo poveikio priemonės;Negative measures
Abstract: Raktiniai žodžiai: direktyva, pranešėjų apsauga, darbo santykiai, pranešėjai, informacijos atskleidimas, neigiamo poveikio priemonės, korupcija, informatoriai, atsakomieji veiksmai. Pranešėjai – asmenys informuojantys atsitinkamas institucijas apie galimai daromus pažeidimus. Atskleista informacija gali būti susijusi su darbo santykiais, todėl darbdaviai prieš pranešėjus gali imtis atsakomųjų veiksmų. Dėl nepakankamos apsaugos asmenys vis dar nenoriai atskleidžia informaciją, kas sukelia neigiamų padarinių viešajam interesui ir bendrai visuomenės gerovei. Šių asmenų apsauga gali padėti užtikrinti veiksmingą visos Sąjungos teisės ir politikos vykdymą, todėl ES tikslas yra suvienodinti pranešėjų apsaugą visos Sąjungos lygiu. 2019 metais Europos Pralamentas (EP) ir taryba parengė asmenų apsaugos direktyvą ES 2019/1937 „dėl asmenų, pranešančių apie sąjungos teisės pažeidimus“. Valstybės narės iki 2021 metų gruodžio 17 d. turės perkelti šią direktyvą į nacionalinę teisę atitinkamai papildydamos savo teisės aktus reglamentuojančius pranešėjų apsaugą. Šiame darbe bus analizuojama „whistleblowing“ reiškinio samprata, apžvelgiami ES teisės aktai, kuriais valstybės narės buvo raginamos sukurti veiksmingesnę pranešėjų apsaugos sistemą. Pagrindinis dėmesys bus skiriamas direktyvos ES 2019/1937 „dėl asmenų, pranešančių apie sąjungos teisės pažeidimus, apsaugos“ nuostatoms, susijusioms su darbo santykiais. Direktyva įpareigoja valstybes nares, kad viešojo ir privačiojo sektoriaus juridiniai asmenys sukurtų veiksmingus ir saugius kanalus pranešimams teikti ir užtikrintų pranešančių asmenų apsaugą. Pirmoje darbo dalyje lyginsime dviejų pasirinktų Europos valstybių teisinį reguliavimą pranešėjų apsaugos srityje ir ieškosime panašumų bei skirtumų: 1. Lietuvos Respublikos Pranešėjų apsaugos įstatymas numato, kad viešojo ir privačiojo sektoriaus juridiniai asmenys įdiegtų vidinius ir išorinius pranešimų teikimo kanalus ir nustatytų tolimesnes procedūras pranešimams teikti. 2. Prancūzijos Loi Sapin ll „dėl skaidrumo, antikorupcinės veiklos ir ekonominio gyvenimo modernizavimo” įstatymas numato, kad siekiant veiksmingesnės kovos su korupcija juridiniai subjektai įdiegtų vidaus pranešimų teikimo kanalus. Šios valstybės narės dar neperkėlė ES direktyvos 2019/1937 „dėl asmenų, pranešančių apie Sąjungos teisės pažeidimus, apsaugos“ į nacionalinę teisę, todėl tikrinsime ar jų dabartinis teisinis reglamentavimas atitinka šios direktyvos nuostatas darbo santykių srityje. Antroje darbo dalyje nagrinėsime JAV ir ES teisinio reguliavimo panašumus ir skirtumus, kadangi JAV yra laikoma pranešėjų apsaugos instituto pradininke. Ši šalis turi daug pranešėjų apsaugą reglamentuojančių įstatymų, tačiau kreipsime dėmesį tik į pagrindinius teisės aktus. Pirmasis yra Pranešėjų apsaugos įstatymas (angl. Whistleblower Protection Act), kuris skirtas 3 užtikrinti asmenų, dirbančių valstybės tarnyboje apsaugą nuo atsakomųjų veiksmų. Antrasis yra Melagingų teiginių įstatymas (angl. Falce Claim Act), kuris užtikrina pranešėjų teises prieš darbdavio atsakomuosius ir skatina pranešėjus teikti informaciją gaunant finansinės naudos.
Whistleblowers are individuals who notice and report any suspicious activities to institutions. The information provided by whistleblowers can also be related to employment relations and an employer could start a retaliation against the whistleblower. For reasons like this, whistleblowers sometimes avoid to share such information and it results in adverse effects on public interest as well as overall wellbeing of society. However, EU is aware that whistleblower protection could ensure an effective implementation of EU law and politics, and intents to equalise whistleblower protection in all EU. In 2019, the European Union adopted the “Directive 2019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law” (Whistleblower Protection Directive). The 27 EU member states have two years from its entry into force (until 17 December 2021) to comply with the Directive. This paper examines the concept of whistleblowing, Legal Acts of the European Union, as well as Member States that were required to create more effective system in order to protect their citizens. The object of this research mainly focus on Directive EU 2019/1937 about individuals when reporting breaches of Union employment related to employment relations. According to Directive, all Member States must protect individuals and their representatives by requiring all employers to create effective and secure communication channels in both, private and public sector. The aim of the study is to analyze the provisions of the European Parliament Directive EU 2019/1937 on the protection of persons reporting breaches of Union law and to compare the protection of Lithuanian and French whistleblowers with a view to determining whether Member States are ready to adopt new rules on whistleblower protection. in the field of law. As this institute was set up in the United States, it is appropriate to compare the similarities and differences between that country's and the EU's legal framework for the protection of whistleblowers. The U.S. is considered the pioneer of the Institute for the Protection of Whistleblowers. The EU institutions follow the best practices of other countries when adopting new legislation, and have applied some principles when adopting the directive on the protection of whistleblowers. For a long time, the protection of whistleblowers in Lithuania was regulated only by general legal acts; discussions on appropriate measures to ensure it started only in 2010 after the registration of the draft Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers of the Republic of Lithuania, which remained unimplemented. It took almost ten years before January 1, 2019 in Lithuania. The Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers (hereinafter referred to as the SAI) entered into force in 2006 and applies to both the public and private sectors. The purpose of the law is to provide employees with information about violations in a safe manner and to provide confidential information to the relevant authorities. In other EU countries and at Union level as a whole, the importance of the protection of whistleblowers has been raised more widely after resonant investigations, in which rapporteurs have helped to uncover cases of corruption, abuse and mismanagement in various areas. In 2016, in order to strengthen the fight against corruption, France adopted the so-called Sapin ll law “on transparency, anti-corruption and modernization of economic life”, which gave rapporteurs wider legal protection and replaced previous specific safeguards in individual legislation. In 2017, half of the EU countries adopted special laws to ensure the protection of whistleblowers, while the rest introduced specific legal provisions on the protection of whistleblowers in sectoral legislation, but protection remains fragmented. This shortcoming in many cases reveals that whistleblowers are not adequately protected, their protection is not guaranteed and they do not feel safe themselves. As a result, there are not many speakers and they are not active. The low activity of whistleblowers results in a low level of detection of irregularities. In line with the legislation on the protection of whistleblowers, Member States will have to transpose the Directive by 2021. december 17 The subject of the work is the legal regulation of the European Parliament and Council Directive EU 2019/1937 on the protection of persons reporting violations of Union law and the protection of Lithuanian and French rapporteurs in the field of labor relations. Work tasks: 1. To review the development of the concept and protection of speakers; 2. To review the legal regulation of the protection of whistleblowers in the EU and to analyze the protection provisions of the EU Directive 2019/1937 “on whistleblowers”, focusing on the field of labor relations; 3. To review the issues of regulation of whistleblower protection in Lithuania; 4. Carry out a comparative analysis of the Lithuanian and French whistleblower protection laws and check whether the legal regulation of the selected countries complies with the requirements of the EU Directive 2019/1937 “on the Protection of Persons Reporting Violations of Union Law” in the field of labor law. 5. Compare the similarities and differences between US legislation on the protection of whistleblowers and the protection of EU Directive 2019/1937 on whistleblowers. Hypothesis - the current legal regulation of the protection of whistleblowers of the Republic of Lithuania does not comply with the provisions of the EU Directive 2019/1937 “on Persons Reporting Violations of Union Law” in the field of labor law. The first part of this paper investigates and compare the legal regulation in Whistleblower protection by selected EU Member States: 1. Known as “Pranešėjų apsaugos įstatymas” in Lithuania, is to ensure that public and private sector employers must implement internal and external whistleblowing tools/channels and set further actions in order to encourage whistleblowers to share the information wanted. 2. Known as “Loi Sapin II” (the law on transparency, the fight against corruption and the modernisation of economic life) stands for more effective acts against corruption, employers must introduce effective, confidential and secure reporting channels. These Member States have not enforced EU Directive 2019/1937, and we will look wether their present Regulations meet standards of ensuring whistleblower protection effectively. The second part of this paper investigates US and EU Regulations resemblance and differences, since US is the beginner of Whistleblower Protection law. Even though US has many laws used to ensure effective whistleblower protection, we will examine only the main legislation. This paper reviews “Whistleblower Protection Act” - the law to ensure Whistleblower protection in public sector, as well as “False Claim Act” - the law to ensure whistleblower right against employer reteliation and encourages to provide nessecary information by providing some financial rewards.
Internet: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/131889
Appears in Collections:2021 m. (TF mag.)

Files in This Item:
gajus_patackas_md.pdf621.31 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

“Whistleblowing”: asmenų, pranešančių apie teisės pažeidimus, apsauga darbo santykiuose

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats


CORE Recommender

Google ScholarTM

Check


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons