Prosecutors Council Strongly Opposes Plan to Transform Whistleblower Protection

Bratislava, 27 November (TASR) – The Council of Slovak Prosecutors has voiced strong opposition to the bill proposing the transformation of the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers (UOO) into a different institution, as well as to the manner in which the proposal is being pushed through, TASR learnt from council chair Stanislav Jakubcik on Thursday. The council warns of serious legal deficiencies that threaten the principles of the rule of law, Slovakia's obligations towards the European Union and the safety of individuals who have reported wrongdoing in good faith. The council states that the conditions for fast-track legislative procedure weren't met in this case. "Fast-track procedures are a tool reserved for extraordinary circumstances in which there is a threat to fundamental human rights, state security or significant economic damage. The submitter has demonstrated none of these circumstances. On the contrary, paradoxically, a tool intended to protect rights is being used to adopt legislation that reduces the level of rights protection. The council also pointed out that the proposed changes may directly contradict the Directive of the European Parliament and of the EU Council on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. "It explicitly states that implementing the directive must not result in a reduction of the level of protection that member states already provide. Abolishing the existing independent Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers and replacing it with an institution with a lower degree of independence and powers represents a flagrant breach of this obligation," Jakubcik explained. "The proposed changes, which politicise the appointment of the new office's leadership and subordinate it to executive power, are incompatible with the requirement of impartiality mandated by European law," the Council underlined. The Slovak Prosecutors Council considers the transitional provisions of the draft law to be constitutionally non-compliant, as they introduce elements of true retroactivity and undermine the principle of legitimate expectations. "The draft bill aims to ensure that protection that has already been lawfully granted to whistleblowers under existing regulations would lapse or be reassessed under new, stricter criteria. Such an approach is unacceptable in a state governed by the rule of law," it stated, noting that whistleblowers acted in reliance on the valid legal order, which guaranteed them protection against retaliation. It warned that the practical consequence of adopting the amendments would be an immediate and significant deterioration in the position of individuals who have reported corruption or other serious wrongdoing. "By narrowing the definition of a whistleblower and weakening the protection mechanism, these individuals would face a direct risk of losing their jobs, harassment, and other forms of retaliation from employers, often linked to public authorities. Uncertainty regarding the duration and scope of protection will have a strong deterrent effect on potential future whistleblowers," added Jakubcik. mf/df