Home > All journals > International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations > 41(1) >
$15.00 - Rental (PDF) *
$29.00 - Article (PDF) *
Felicia Roșioru
International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations
Volume 41, Issue 1 (2025) pp. 23 – 40
httpss://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2025003
Abstract
Whistleblower protection has existed in Romania since 2004,
with the law providing free choice as to the means to reveal breaches of the
law. However, in most cases, the courts have decided that the persons revealing
breaches of the law were not protected as whistleblowers, as there was no
public interest in the disclosure. On the other hand, the European Court of
Human Rights (ECtHR) has protected Romanian whistleblowers under the scope of
the freedom of expression. In this context, the new regulation has attempted to
balance the provisions of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons
who report breaches of Union law, the case-law of the ECtHR and the Council of
Europe’s conventions against corruption. The result is a complex regulation
that might lead to uncertainty as to who qualifies for whistleblower protection
and thus render the law less effective.
Keywords
Whistleblower Protection, Work-Based Relationships, Public Interest, Duty of Loyalty, Good-Faith, Public Disclosure
Extract
Whistleblower protection has existed in Romania since 2004,
with the law providing free choice as to the means to reveal breaches of the
law. However, in most cases, the courts have decided that the persons revealing
breaches of the law were not protected as whistleblowers, as there was no
public interest in the disclosure. On the other hand, the European Court of
Human Rights (ECtHR) has protected Romanian whistleblowers under the scope of
the freedom of expression. In this context, the new regulation has attempted to
balance the provisions of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons
who report breaches of Union law, the case-law of the ECtHR and the Council of
Europe’s conventions against corruption. The result is a complex regulation
that might lead to uncertainty as to who qualifies for whistleblower protection
and thus render the law less effective.