Silent Heroes: Whistleblowers Across Borders and Legal Shields Unveiled


Whistle blower is a person who works in an organization and has insider knowledge about a certain practice(s) of organization which are morally wrong, unethical, illegal, or harmful. He/she brings out this information in the public eye to stop this practice(s). This courageous step taken by whistleblower is often rooted in their moral values. Certain countries in world offer legal protection to whistleblowers by keeping their identity anonymous by enacting a statute, whereas in many countries whistleblowers take legal route, help from media or use social media to expose the organization.


There is no globally accepted definition for Whistleblower. According to The Economics Times, A whistleblower is a person, who could be an employee of a company, or a government agency, disclosing information to the public or some higher authority about any wrongdoing, which could be in the form of fraud, corruption, etc.

Some famous whistle blowing incidents 

International Incidents

1. Edward Snowden

He was former National Security Agency Contractor for United States of America. In 2013 he            exposed global surveillance program conducted by USA and its allies. The incident spiraled and Edward Snowden had to take asylum in Russia. His trail is pending in US courts.

2. Julian Assagne

Julian Assagne case famously known as WikiLeaks case, he was the founder of website WikiLeaks where they used to publish secret documents which covered a wide range of subjects, including government surveillance, military operations, diplomatic communications, and corporate practices. WikiLeaks had published many documents related to American war operations, for which he was to be arrested by American agencies, he took political asylum in Ecuadorian Embassy for 7 years in London before getting arrested in 2019.

3. Frances Haugen

She is an American Data Engineer and Scientist who used to work with Facebook, she gave various internal reports of Facebook to The Wall Street Journal in 2021 which highlighted Facebook’s policy of Profits over Safety.

4. Karen Silkwood

In 1972, Karen Silkwood began working as a chemical technician at the Kerr-McGee nuclear plant near Crescent, Oklahoma. Silkwood joined the local Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Union, and investigated health and safety issues at the plant as a union activist. Silkwood discovered numerous safety issues including exposure of workers to contamination, faulty respiratory equipment, and more; she testified to the United States Atomic Energy Commission in summer 1974 about her concerns. 

Indian Incidents

1. Vijay Pandhare

He was the Chief Engineer in Maharashtra Water Resources Department, in 2012 he wrote a letter to Chief Minister of state highlighting financial irregularities in the irrigation project of the state. The charges made by him resulted in resignation of Deputy Chief Minister of the state.

2. Gaurav Taneja

He is a famous YouTuber and commercial flight pilot, in 2020 he had highlighted unsafe flight landing practices adopted by AirAsia Carrier to reduce fuel cost while risking lives of passengers. He was fired from AirAsia and was sued by the Carrier.

3. Infosys Whistleblower case

A whistle blower had reported to US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that senior panel of the organization was fudging financial numbers to gain short term profits from stock exchanges. The organization got clean chit from US SEC but this incident forced Indian Government to work on corporate Whistle Blowers rules .

4. Chanda Kochhar case

Arvind Gupta, a shareholder activist, exposed the alleged loan fraud and quid pro quo between the ICICI bank’s then CEO Chanda Kochhar and her family and the Videocon group. Kochhar stepped down following the allegations and CBI has now opened a probe into the matter.


What Protection does Whistle Blowers have?

International Scenario

1. South Korea’s Whistleblower Protection and Reward System

South Korea has enacted various statutes to not just protect Whistleblowers but also reward such individuals. Acts such as Tax Evasion Informant Reward Program, Foreign Financial Account Report Reward Program, Act on the Protection of Public Interest Whistleblowers etc. Due to these steps the individuals feels confidents when they report such incidents which ultimately helps curb corruption.

2. European Union’s Whistleblower Directive

These guidelines were passed by EU in 2019, which directed its 27 member nations to follow/incorporate these directives while dealing with whistleblowing incidents and grant them legal protection even if the charges by whistleblowers were proved wrong.

3. Canadian Whistleblower Laws

The Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) launched whistleblower reward law under the Offshore Tax Informant Program (OTIP) to track down tax cheats. Two years later, the province of Ontario, Canada took a step further and passed the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) whistleblower program to protect investors from unfair and fraudulent practices. To date, both of Canada’s whistleblower programs have been incredibly successful with whistleblowers receiving over CAD $1 million in rewards for their disclosures under the OTIP by 2019 and OSC whistleblowers receiving more than CAD $8.6 million since its establishment.

4. United Nations Whistleblower policy

The UN's Ethics Office is responsible for promoting and maintaining high standards of ethical conduct within the organization. It provides guidance on ethical issues, including those related to whistleblowing.


Indian Scenario

1. Law Commission in 2001 had recommended to make a Whistleblower policy to protect whistle blower and curb corruption in country. Later in 2004 when a whistleblower of NHAI corruption case was murdered, Supreme Court directed Union Government to come up with law to protect whistleblower. The government, in response, notified a resolution in 2004 named, ‘Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers Resolution (PIDPIR)’. This resolution gave the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) the power to act on complaints from whistleblowers.

2. In 2014 Government came up with Whistleblower Protection Act, but there was severe lacuna in it i.e. this statute was available only to/against public servants, corporate India was completely out of its ambit.

3. According to Companies Act 2013, section 177, every listed company must have a Vigil Mechanism to address legitimate concern. Moreover, this Act specifies that, mechanism must include sufficient safeguards to prevent victimization of individuals utilizing the reporting system. Additionally, there is a stipulation to disclose details of the mechanism on the company's website. It is to be noted that this Vigil Mechanism clause is applicable to only Listed Companies and not to privately held companies, thus a significant amount of Industry is outside the ambit of any Whistleblower protection mechanism.

4. 2015 SEBI Regulations (Prohibition of Insider Trading): Regulation 9 mandates listed businesses to develop a code of conduct to combat insider trading, as well as a policy on the code of practices and processes for fair disclosure of unpublished price-sensitive information. The policy often includes provisions for reporting concerns about unethical behavior.

 


UCC: Search for unity in a Diverse India

 The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a proposal in India that is aimed at replacing personal, traditional, customary and religious laws and practices with a common statute applicable to all irrespective of their religion, caste, gender etc.

Civil laws are broadly categorized in two types: Financial laws and Family laws. While discussing about UCC, we focus mainly on Family laws.


EVOLUTION OF PERSONAL LAWS

Ancient India was mostly governed by Brahamanical order of society and laws books like Yajnavalkyasmriti, Manusmriti and Naradsmriti, among these, they governed the social order, religious duty, traditions etc. which were socially accepted morals and legal norms in ancient India.

Given the Hindu majority in medieval India, Muslim rulers adopted a middle ground approach. Hindus' civil matters followed their personal laws, while Muslims were guided by canonical texts like the Quran, Hadith, Sunnah, and Fatwa-e-Alamgir. All state subjects were subjected to uniform criminal laws based on retributive justice.

Law reforms were started in India while it was ruled by the English. Civil law were untouched, whereas criminal law changed from retributive to rehabilitative. The Gentoo Code of Warren Hastings, compiled Hindu legal texts and were used to settle Hindu civil disputes, while Kazis overlooked the Muslim personal law.

Social reformers of the time, with British tried reforming Hindu society, Acts like the Sati Abolition Act 1829, Caste Disabilities Act 1850, Hindu Widow Remarriage Act 1856, Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929, Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act 1937 were enacted to reform Hindu society.

Similarly, Muslim personal laws were codified under Muslim Personal Law Act 1937 and Muslim Marriage Act 1939. Christian personal laws saw the enactment of Christian Marriage Act 1872, Indian Divorce Act 1869, and Indian Succession Act 1925. Parsi personal laws were codified under Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936.

Post-independence, Hindu Code Bill was passed, comprising of: Hindu Succession Act 1956, Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Hindu Guardianship Act 1956, and Hindu Maintenance Act 1955. These codified laws covered approximately 87% of India’s population, leaving out Muslim, Christian, and Parsi communities. The framers of the Constitution considered the time unfit for reforming personal laws due to the recent partition, thus making UCC a Directive Principles of State Policy to be addressed by future governments.

Every religion in India has its own set of rules that are socially acceptable despite being discriminatory towards women, children, and adoptive family members.

Example:
  1. Christian and Parsi laws do not recognize children born out of wedlock, granting succession rights only to legitimate children.¹
  2. In Muslim community after the abolishment of Triple Talaq, system of ‘Khula’ is adopted, which is initiated by women unlike triple talaq. However this system is forced upon women by men, and wives are obligated to return Meher to their husbands, financial obligations of husband vary on case-by-case basis, which is regressive towards women.
  3. In Assam, recent crackdowns on child marriages charged husbands under the POSCO Act, despite Muslim personal law permitting marriage after puberty. The Special Marriage Act 1954 prescribes girls' minimum marriage age at 18, conflicting with Muslim personal laws, resulting in numerous Assamese marriages being declared void.
  4. Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), is a legal entity allowing Hindu families to claim tax benefits. However, any such equivalent benefits are not available to other religions which is violation of Article 14 of Indian Constitution.
  5. Furthermore, an illegitimate child is not considered a part of the Hindu Joint Family, which also infringes upon their right to ancestral property.
While judiciary has tried addressing these issues, it often lacks the comprehensive input from all stakeholders to reform all personal laws.

Reforms by the Judiciary:

  1. In Moro Vishwanath vs. Ganesh Vithal, Supreme Court interpreted the difference between Hindu Joint Family and a Coparcenary under Mitakshara and Dayabhaga school of law.³
  2. In Sujata Sharma vs. Shri Manu Gupta, Delhi High Court ruled that in a HUF a female can become a ‘Karta’.⁴
  3. In 2017 a petition was filed in Supreme Court by Naomi Sam Irani challenging the jury system in Parsi matrimonial disputes. The jury's decision is final, and no appeals are permitted; this is unfair to Parsis compared to people of other religions, and it also violates article 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. (The matter is still subjudice).
  4. In Shayara Bano vs. Union of India, Supreme court declared Triple Talaq in Muslim community as unconstitutional and abolished it.⁵
  5. In Molly Joseph vs. George Sebastian, Supreme Court held that Canon laws in Christianity may have religious implications for individual but they are not above civil laws (i.e. Indian Divorce Act, 1869).⁶
Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to enact judicial reforms. However, excessive use of these powers may lead to judicial overreach. To prevent this we need a statue like UCC. 
Holistic thinking is essential when debating about UCC that would cover entire nation, including sexual and gender minorities. These communities lacks legislation that addresses their marriage, adoption, succession, and divorce as being excluded from personal laws.

Reference Case laws:

  1. Delhi High Court. Raj Kumar Sharma vs. Rajinder Nath Diwan. AIR1987 Del323
  2. Supreme court of India. Revanasiddappa vs. Mallikarjun. 2023 INSC783
  3. Supreme Court of India. Moro Vishwanath vs. Ganesh Vithal. (1873) 10 Bom.444
  4. Delhi High Court. Sujata Sharma vs. Shri Manu Gupta. CS(OS)--2011/2006
  5. Supreme court of India. Shayara Bano vs. Union of India. (2017)9 SCC1
  6. Supreme court of India. Molly Joseph vs. George Sebastian. AIR1997 SC109






Sensationalization of Judiciary : Ill-effects of streaming court proceedings online

Post COVID-19 pandemic, Indian Judiciary had begun online streaming of courtroom proceedings. The Supreme Court of India was the first one t...