Amendments to the Whistleblowers Protection Bill

The amendment in the Senate of the Law for the defense of whistleblowers is essential

Better that there be this than that there is nothing, it seems that the promoters of the version of the Law for the defense of whistleblowers approved in the last plenary session of Parliament in 2022 want us to say.

Well no. For us it is better that there is nothing.

We have demanded on many occasions that the Law for the defense of whistleblowers be amended so that it does not end up being a mere procedure to show off (because of the EU obligations) without really protecting the bulk of those who denounce corruption and abuses that affect the general interest.

The version approved in the last plenary session of 2022 is still extremely deficient and we ask every parliamentary groups to amend it as it reaches the Senate.

Next, we return to the amendments that we consider essential for the text to achieve the necessary guarantees so that those who report on practices that undermine the general interest can do so with all the guarantees and without suffering retaliations, as we propose in our Law template in transposition of the Directive.

The more detailed motivations can be read here -> or -> here [ES]


• Statement of reasons
– Art.2

It contemplates only ” Actions or omissions that may constitute a serious or very serious criminal or administrative offense.”

It is essential to extend it to all those practices that harm the general interest such as abuses of power, violations of codes of conduct, less serious actions, etc. In other words, without that, this law would serve only a few cases and not to establish the democratic hygiene that society, fed up with so many systemic abuses, demands. In addition, the people who report do not have the knowledge to know if an offense is considered serious or not and this doubt would inhibit them.

245-247 Compromís-MásPaís
92-94 ERC

– Art.3

Incorporate the protection of intermediaries and facilitators ( NGOs , etc…) because very often the people who inform help and in many cases are essential for the information to see the light. The information channels that they are managing are not even defended, as it would be the case for us and the leaks box that to brought the Black Cards to light.

248 Compromís-MásPaís
96-97 ERC

– In art. 18 (“rational indications of having been obtained through the commission of a crime”) and art.38 (“This measure will not affect criminal responsibilities.”)
Criminal responsibility must be eliminated if it is related to obtaining the information and does not imply crimes against the safety of persons. Otherwise, the people who reported on the Panama Papers or the Falciani list, to make just two examples, would not be able to receive protection. That is, this law would serve little or nothing.

By the way, it is in any case very painful to see how, in the Villarejo case, so many exceptions for institutions have been admitted.

251-258 Compromís-MásPaís
107-119 ERC

– In Art.18, 20 and Twelfth Final Provision
An error is repeated, previously eliminated from articles 9 and 17 in which those who report anonymously are discriminated, despite the fact that it is a requirement of the Directive. It must be eliminated that it is not possible to be informed in due time of “the processing of your complaint and the results of the investigation if the communication was anonymous”.

Clear requirements need to be established for mailboxes/channels for reporting so that there is no discrimination against those who report anonymously. We have been demonstrating that it is possible since 2017, installing mailboxes in more than 10 institutions (

107-109 ERC
And create one for the Twelfth Final Provision

– Art.19
Authority must not overreach. We must remember that the Authority in this case does not investigate the facts. It only have to decide whether to grant protection to the reporting person.

Therefore, so much power is not understood without a court order: “All natural or legal persons, private or public, must collaborate with the competent authorities and will be obliged to meet the requirements that are addressed to them to provide documentation, data or any information related to the procedures that are being processed, including the personal data that were required.”

144-146 PdCat

– Art. 38 (Points 1 and 5)
It is essential to reverse the burden of proof


First final provision
Finally, much-needed legal assistance is limited to only those with very low salaries (less than €2,400 gross), vastly reducing the number of people who can afford to report systemic abuses.

Change “(…) less than four times the public income indicator” to “(…) less than eight times the public income indicator”.