The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS  

Tribune Staff Reporter  

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

ST Anne’s MP Adrian White said the Protected Disclosures Bill fails to provide sufficient protection for whistleblowers who report misconduct by high-ranking officials, members of the armed forces, and other powerful figures, insisting many will still be intimidated to report wrongdoing.

He questioned how people filing complaints against powerful officials, including armed forces members and senior government figures, could feel safe without clear safeguards and expressed doubt that the bill would encourage complaints, noting that many constituents would be too intimidated to come forward.

The Protected Disclosures Bill prohibits retaliation against people who make a protected disclosure, specifically forbidding employers from subjecting employees to occupational detriment, such as unfair treatment or dismissal, as a result of their whistleblowing. It also criminalises any act of intimidation or coercion against someone who has made a disclosure, including attempts to discourage or silence them. The bill mandates strict confidentiality, ensuring that the identity of whistleblowers remains protected during investigations.

While these provisions create a legal framework to prevent retaliation, Mr White argued that they cannot guarantee that whistleblowers will always be free from harm or fear, as enforcement and the application of these laws will ultimately determine their real-world effectiveness.

“You’re asking individuals to come forward with complaints against members of the security armed forces, individuals licenced to carry weapons as well as specified officials,” he said. “So, the Act is trying to convince me that it’s safe for me to make a complaint against the Member of Parliament because I’m protected. That’s lovely. I mean. I get as much comfort in the weapons formed against me by picking up the Bible, praising God and putting all in his hands. “ 

Under the bill, a designated authority will be responsible for investigating complaints and ensuring compliance with the law. The authority can make recommendations, involve law enforcement, and conduct hearings related to disclosures.

Additionally, the bill imposes severe penalties for those who obstruct the reporting process, intimidate whistleblowers, or retaliate against them. Offenders could face fines of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to two years. Employers are also prohibited from taking adverse actions, such as dismissal or demotion, against employees who make protected disclosures. 

Meanwhile, the Organisation for Responsible Governance (ORG) acknowledged yesterday that the Davis administration views the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill and the Protected Disclosures Bill –– both of which passed the House of Assembly yesterday –– as fulfilling the role of the previously proposed Integrity Commission Bill.

However, ORG highlighted the absence of key elements such as public education on integrity, systemic corruption risk assessments, monitoring anti-corruption policies, structured financial disclosures for officials, and an established code of ethics. Without these safeguards, ORG warned that corruption risks would persist, undermining public trust and governance.

The organisation called for continued public consultation and bipartisan collaboration to strengthen the legislation, ensuring it not only investigates misconduct but actively prevents corruption.