Provisions of Namibia’s Whistleblower Protection Act may be too lenient and warrant revision.
The act currently protects whistleblowers from retaliation or detrimental actions. Detrimental retaliation against whistleblowers is a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to N$75 000 or imprisonment for up to 15 years, or both.
This is according to Ministry of Justice executive director Gladice Pickering yesterday during the two-day TAIEX Workshop on Advancing Whistleblower Protection, which started in Windhoek on Tuesday.
Pickering was reacting to perspectives shared by the European Union (EU) ambassador to Namibia, Ana-Beatriz Martins, in her opening address to the workshop on Tuesday.
Martins said the EU established the Whistleblower Protection Directive in 2019 to protect individuals who report breaches of EU law in areas including public procurement, financial services, anti-money laundering as well as environmental protection.
Namibia enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act in 2017 to protect individuals who report misconduct and corruption.
However, Martins impressed on the audience the difference between having laws in place to protect whistleblowers and ensuring that such laws are effectively implemented and enforced.
“In the fast evolving digital age, it is necessary to look at new ways to safeguard the anonymity of those who denounce misconduct on virtual platforms,” Martins said.
Pickering said harassment of whistleblowers is a serious infringement of the law, which protects whistleblowers and the people related or associated with them from detrimental action.
“If you compare the importance of our whistleblower[s] compared to that fine, I think [it] might be too low,” she said.
The executive director also said, in the absence of operational legislation, there might not be enough protection for whistleblowers. Once the act is operationalised and there are fully implemented legal and institutional frameworks, Pickering said, more whistleblowers might come forward.
She added that whistleblowers should also be taught their responsibilities, such as not exposing themselves publicly.
Alexandra Mbako, a senior legal officer in the directory of the Master of the High Court, shared similar sentiments about the need for the various offices and committees that could protect whistleblowers once the act comes into force.
“I believe due to financial constraints and [lack of] political will, the act has not been implemented,” Mbako added.
There are other forms of protection for whistleblowers such as Section 52 of the Anti-Corruption Act and some sections of the Criminal Procedure Act, but Mbako said they do not sufficiently safeguard whistleblowers.
Institute for Public Policy Research director Graham Hopwood questioned why the Whistleblower Protection Act has not been operationalised eight years after being passed.
“The problem is there is no sign of the law coming into operation because the first sign would have been some money allocated in the budget, and none has been allocated so far. We can tell there is political will when we see money being allocated in the budget for a particular purpose. Otherwise whistleblowers do not have much protection,” he said.
Addressing the workshop virtually, the acting director of the Corruption Prevention Commission of Zambia, Kevin Siwale, said there is need to provide guidance to whistleblowers on what they need to report.
“The commission plans to conduct launches in provincial centres and when you develop a system, the launch should be high level to even include the president or minister of justice,” he said.
He advised Namibians to adopt a culture of seeing corruption as a public enemy and something each person should tackle personally.
He said the most important thing is to ensure anonymity for the whistleblowers.
Monika Kalinauskiene, the assistant chief prosecutor general in the general prosecutor’s office in Lithuania, said whistleblower protection is a new concept even in Europe and every country has to do more, no matter the measures it has in place.
“Every country needs to have a rules map but for Namibia, first of all you have to have operational institutions that have enough power to protect whistleblowers,” Kalinauskiene said.
“You must have secure channels through which whistleblowers can report, and those channels must ensure anonymity.
Only when you have channels in place can you start awareness-raising campaigns and promotions,” she added.
She said it is important to have measures against retaliation to protect whistleblowers but the most important thing is anonymity. “If your identity is not known, there will be no retaliation,” she said.
– email: matthew@namibian.com.na
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!
