1

WHISTLE BLOWER: Broken lives and

organizational power

“BEING RIGHT WILL NOT FEED YOUR FAMILY OR PAY THE MORTGAGE”

INTRODUCTION:
The whistle blower is a concerned citizen who initiates, of his or her own free will, an open
disclosure about significant wrongdoing directly perceived in a particular occupational role to
a person or agency capable of investigating the complaint and facilitating the correction of
wrongdoing. This person or agency is totally or predominantly motivated by notions of public
interest. BUT Whistle blowers frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the
organization or group which they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and
sometimes under law. Questions about the legitimacy of whistle blowing, the moral
responsibility of the whistle blowing, and the appraisal of the institutions of whistle blowing
are part of the field of political ethics. “BLOWING THE WHISTLE” is an act of courage and
risk, particularly in India. The history of whistle blowing reveals that these rare but
courageous people often end up losing their jobs, peace of mind and sometimes, their lives.
Whistle blowing is “an act of a man or a woman who, believing that the public
interest overrides the interest of the organization he serves, blows the whistle that the
organization is in corrupt, illegal, fraudulent or harmful activity.”

Types of whistle blowing

There are three types of whistle blowing:-

I. Internal:-most whistleblowers are internal whistle blowers, who report misconduct

on a fellow employee or superior within their company. There are some reasons to
believe that people are more likely to take action with respect to unacceptable
behavior, within an organization, if there is a choice of options for absolute
confidentiality.
II. External:- external whistle blowers, however reports misconduct to outside persons
or entities .in these cases ,depending on the information’s severity and
nature ,whistleblowers may report the misconduct to lawyers ,the media, law
enforcement or watchdog agencies ,or other local ,state ,or federal agencies . In some
cases, external whistle blowing is encouraged by offering monetary reward.
 2

III. Third party: - the third party service involves utilizing an external agency to inform
the individuals at the top of the organizational pyramid of misconduct, without
disclosing the identity of the whistleblower.

WHISTLE BLOWER’S BROKEN LIFE:

John Brown, a whistle blower, says,
“If I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t blow the whistle for a million dollars. It ruined my
life. My neighbor kept talking about all these stories he’d read about “the little man who
stood up against the big corporations and won”. Well, I stood up against the big corporation
and I lost. I didn’t just lose my jab. I lost my family. I don’t even see my kids anymore. My
ex-father-in-law said if I’d ever been a real whistle blower I’d have been on 60 minutes.
I spent $50000 to have my day in court, only it was more like my minute in court. After five
years of waiting to get to court, the judge said I didn’t have to sue. I was out on the street an
hour after I walked in the door. I still owe my lawyer.
My boss, the one who told me to lie on the FBI, he got a promotion. You know what I do
now? I deliver pizza. Me, a licensed professional engineer. The Engineer Association, the just
wished me luck, said they admired someone who stood up for his beliefs. Take that to the
bank. They wouldn’t even help me find a new job. Nobody understands. Lots of people say
they admire my spunk, but nobody has any idea of the consequences. No one wants to know.
So, I think I was crazy to blow the whistle. Only I don’t think I ever had a choice. It was
speak out or stroke out. So, all I can really say is that I wouldn’t do it again if I didn’t have to.
But maybe I’d have to. I don’t know.”
It was the plight of a whistle blower from outside India. With reference to India, the whistle
blowers do not lose their jobs, but lives.
WHISTLE BLOWER’S LOST LIFE:
Satyendra Dubey (1973-2003) was a project director at the National Highways Authority of
India (NHAI). He spots huge financial irregularities in handling of GQ project. Sends an
anonymous letter to the PMO with a separate 
CV attached telling the PM how many contractors had "submitted forged documents to
justify their technical and financial capabilities" to win bids for the contract. He requests PM
not to reveal his identity. Letter is forwarded along with the
CV to the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. On Nov 27, 2002, Shot dead in Gaya.
Case is presented as that of robbery by CBI.
Shanmugam Manjunath (1978–2005) was a marketing manager (grade A officer) for the
Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) who was murdered for sealing a corrupt petrol station in
Lakhimpur Kheri, UP. This incident inspired several students at IIM, IIT and other institutes
culminating with the IIM students setting up the "The Manjunath Shanmugam Trust".
The list is endless. But this necessitates for the protection of whistle blowers in india through
some laws.

PROBLEM OF WHISTLE BLOWING IN INDIA:

 3

Corruption often goes unchallenged when people do not speak out about it. Witness accounts
offer invaluable insights into corruption, and are powerful tools in the fight against it. From
exposing multi-million dollar financial scams to dangerous medical practices, whistleblowers
play a crucial role in saving resources and even lives.
But in some countries, blowing the whistle can carry high personal risk – particularly when
there is little legal protection against dismissal, humiliation or even physical abuse. Controls
on information, libel and defamation laws, and inadequate investigation of whistleblowers’
claims can all deter people from speaking out.
Whistleblowers are less likely to report workplace misconduct when their employers do not
provide clear internal reporting channels. And in some settings, whistle blowing carries
connotations of betrayal rather than being seen as a benefit to the public. Ultimately,
societies, institutions and citizens lose out when there is no one willing to cry foul in the face
of corruption
SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM:
Whistleblowers are invaluable in exposing corruption, fraud and mismanagement. Early
disclosure of wrongdoing or the risk of wrongdoing can protect human rights, help to save
lives and preserve the rule of law.
Safeguards also protect and encourage people willing to take the risk of speaking out about
corruption. We must push countries to introduce comprehensive whistleblower legislation to
protect those that speak out and ensure that their claims are properly investigated.
Companies, public bodies and non-profit organisations should introduce mechanisms for
internal reporting. And workplace reprisals against whistleblowers should be seen as another
form of corruption.
Public education is also essential to de-stigmatise whistle blowing, so that citizens understand
how disclosing wrongdoing benefits the public good. When witnesses of corruption are
confident about their ability to report it, corrupt individuals cannot hide behind the wall of
silence

WHISTLE BLOWING LEGISLATION IN INDIA:

The Whistleblower Protection Act, 2011 is a novel legislation that provides for the public
interest disclosure and protection to whistle blowers.

OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT:

Corruption is a social evil which prevents proper and balanced social growth and economic
development. One of the impediments felt in eliminating corruption in the Government and
the public sector undertakings is lack of adequate protection to the complainants reporting the
corruption or willful misuse of power or willful misuse of discretion which causes
demonstrable loss to the Government or commission of a criminal offence by a public
servant.

It has been felt that the persons who report the corruption or willful misuse of power or
 4

willful misuse of discretion which cause demonstrable loss to the Government or commission
of a criminal offence by a public servant need statutory protection as protection given to them
by the said Resolution of the Government of India of 2004 would not suffice.

In view of the position stated in the forgoing paragraphs, it was decided to enact a separate
legislation to provide adequate protection to the persons reporting corruption or willful
misuse of power or discretion which causes loss to the Government or who disclose the
commission of a criminal offence by a public servant. Furthermore, it aims at providing the
procedure to inquire into such disclosure and to provide adequate safeguards against
victimization of the whistle-blowers and persons reporting matters regarding the corruption
by a public servant punishment for revealing the identity of a complainant, negligently or
and also to those who file false or frivolous complaints.

FEATURES OF THE ACT:

 Public Interest Disclosure

The Bill, under section 3, provides that any public servant or any other person including a
non-governmental organization may make a public interest disclosure to a Competent
Authority i.e. the Central or State Vigilance Commission. “Disclosure” has been defined as
any complaint made in writing or electronic mail against a public servant on matters related
to (a) attempt to or commission of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988;
(b) willful misuse of power which leads to demonstrable loss to the government or gain to the
public servant; or (c) attempt or commission of a criminal offence by a public servant.

 Procedure of Inquiry

The Bill, under section 6 provides for the procedure of inquiry. The Vigilance Commission,
at first, should ascertain the identity of the complainant and has to protect such identity unless
the complainant has revealed it to any other authority. It shall then decide whether the matter
needs to be investigated based on the disclosure or after making discreet inquiries. On the
decision of the investigation, it should seek an explanation from the head of the concerned
department, office, or as the case maybe. The Commission has to protect the identity of the
complainant to the head of the organisation or department unless it becomes imminently
necessary to do so. Even then, the head of the organisation cannot reveal the identity of the
complainant. After conducting the inquiry, if the commission feels that there is no substantial
matter or merit in the case, it shall close the case or if the inquiry substantiates allegation of
corruption or misuse of power, it shall recommend certain measures to the public authority
within the jurisdiction of the Commission. The bill also provides or the measures to be taken
such as it can initiate proceedings against the concerned public servant or it can take steps to
redress the loss that has been caused to the government. It can also recommend the initiation
 5

of criminal proceedings against the official or necessary corrective measure. Other than these,
it can take any other action which is imminent for the purpose of the Act.

 Safeguards for Persons Making Disclosure

The name of the Bill itself makes it very clear that the purpose of this act is the protection of
the persons who make public interest disclosure or have assisted in such matters from
possible victimization or harassment and the Central Government has to ensure such
protection. The Commission has been empowered to give proper direction to the concerned
authorities for the protection of complainant or witness either on an application by the
complainant or based on its own information. It can also direct that the public servant who
made the disclosure may be restored to his previous position .The Vigilance Commission
shall protect the identity of the complainant and related documents, unless it decides against
doing so, or is required by a court to do so. Furthermore, the Commission is empowered to
pass interim orders to prevent any ac of corruption continuing during inquiry.

There have been various other cases of whistleblower victimization which have shocked the
conscience of the society at large and led to huge public outcry. Unless the above
recommendations are properly introduced in this legislation, it will be not be able to achieve
the object of this Bill. As on 1st September 2013, The Bill is still pending even though it has
been passed by the Lok Sabha. The lack of public debate on this Bill is itself evident of the
attitude of the government as it is customary that a new piece of legislation is sent to the state
governments and views and opinions of the public are also invited, which has not been done
in this case. It is time that the government takes a tough stance against rising corruption.

ORGANIZATION’S SUPPORT:

Steps for creating whistle blowing culture in the organizations:-

some of the steps an organization should take to create a healthy whistle blowing culture in
the organization are as follows:-

 To create policy: every organization should have a well defined policy for the
whistle blowing activities :-
 Formal mechanism for reporting violations, such as hot lines and mail boxes.
 Clear communications about bans on retaliation.
 In addition, a clear connection should exist between an organization’s code of
ethics and performance measures.
 Get endorsement from top management: top management ,starting with CEO,
should demonstrate a strong commitment to encouraging whistle blowing. This
message must be communicated by line managers at all levels, who are trained
continuously in creating an open-door policy regarding employee.
 Investigate and follow up:- manager should be required to investigate all allegations
promptly and thoroughly, and report the origins and the results of the investigation to
the higher authority.
 6

 Publicize the organization’s commitment:-to create a culture of openness and

honesty, it is important that employees hear about the policy regularly .top
management should make every effort to talk about commitment to ethical behavior
in memos, newsletters, and speeches to company personnel.
 Assess the organization’s internal whistle blowing system:- find out employees
opinions about the organization’s culture vis a vis its commitment to ethics and
values.

Barriers to a successful internal whistle blowing program are:-

 A lack of trust in the internal system
 Unwillingness of employees to be “snitches”
 Misguided union solidarity.
 Briefly that management is not held to the same standard.
 Fear of retaliation
 Fear of alienation from peers.

EXERCISES OF WHISTLE BLOWING IN INDIAN CORPORATION (Wipro)

The Wipro company has adopted ombuds process policy wherein it has established
procedures for receiving ,retaining and treating complaints received and procedures
for the confidential and anonymous submission by employees of complaints regarding
possible violations of the code of conduct and ethics.
Under this policy ,Wipro employees are encouraged to report questionable accounting
matters, any reporting of fraudulent financial or other information to the stakeholders,
any conduct that results in violation of the company’s code of business conduct and
ethics, to management(on an anonymous basis, if employees so desire).likewise,
under this policy, the company has prohibited discrimination, retaliation or
harassment of any kind against any employees who, based on the employee’s
reasonable belief that such conduct or practice have occurred or are occurring, reports
that information or participates in the investigation.

CONCLUSION:
The number of whistle blowing practices has been on rise for the past few years. It is
evident from the fact that the year 2014 has been declared as the ”YEAR OF
WHISTLE BLOWERS”. This proves that people, today, refuse to accept the mighty
lies and corruption. They are courageous enough to stand for truth.
Dr. Bill Corcoran says,
“ If you want safety, peace, or justice, work for competency,
honesty , and transparency.”
7