Ombudsman Appeals to Constitutional Court over Whistleblowers Office

Bratislava, 15 December (TASR) - Ombudsman Robert Dobrovodsky has sent a letter to the Constitutional Court regarding the adopted law on the Crime Victims and Whistleblowers Protection Office, which is set to replace the existing Whistleblowers Protection Office (UOO) as of the new year, TASR was told by the ombudsman's spokesperson Branislav Gigac on Monday. In his letter, Dobrovodsky supported a proposal submitted by opposition MPs, as he considers suspending the effect of the law to be necessary. He fears irreversible interference with fundamental rights and freedoms. The main problem is the provision that allows for a review of whistleblower protection at any time. According to Dobrovodsky, this introduces unpredictability into the system. "Whistleblowers may find themselves in a situation in which they are unsure whether their protection will remain in place. Such uncertainty has the potential to discourage individuals from reporting serious violations of the law," stressed the ombudsman, adding that retroactive revocation of protection could have an intimidating effect. Dobrovodsky also pointed out that the state is changing the rules retroactively. "The state invited whistleblowers to trust it. However, the new law sends out a signal that this trust could be questioned retroactively. The newly adopted law tells whistleblowers who trusted the state in the past that the invitation to show trust wasn't meant to be taken so seriously," he said. MPs overrode President Peter Pellegrini's veto and reapproved a law transforming UOO into a new authority on Friday (12 December). A new Crime Victims and Whistleblowers Protection Office will thus be set up in Slovakia, replacing the current UOO. In addition to handling whistleblower cases, it will take over the agenda of compensating victims of crime from the Justice Ministry. The opposition has also turned to the Constitutional Court regarding the law setting up the new office, objecting that it could be incompatible with the Constitution and European Union law, as well as to the process of its adoption. The motion was signed by 63 MPs. am/df