Whistleblowers: regulators of last resort

We’ve become increasingly dependent on whistleblowers to signal to society that something has gone wrong in government, industry or commerce, writes Bea Edwards.

Over the past half-century, national governments have developed complex regulatory structures to oversee public health, banking, utilities, food safety, communications, transportation and other industries. By the 1980s, however, the United States and United Kingdom began pushing the policy pendulum in the other direction – deregulating industries sector by sector. Through international organisations, governments around the world imported deregulatory policies and imposed them on their own economies.

Since then, we’ve learned that the market alone cannot right itself when it is fundamentally destabilised by inequality or impropriety. Without the regulations we once had, we’ve become increasingly dependent on whistleblowers to signal to the larger society that something has gone wrong in government, industry or commerce. Whistleblowers became the regulators of last resort.

Whistleblowers do not, however, have the protection and force of government regulators. When they make disclosures in the public interest about wrongdoing, they enter into an extremely unequal battle from which they rarely emerge unscathed. A corrupt employer will ruin a whistleblower in order to protect an illicit operation. Those of us working to protect whistleblowers have learned this the hard way.

It is encouraging to see the growing number of governments now adopting whistleblower protection measures or strengthening those already in place. Still, much work remains. Many national legal systems provide little or no protection from reprisal, and many laws are riddled with loopholes or weakened by generalities.

In an era of concentrated economic and political power, whistleblowers take enormous risks when they come forward to expose dangers to the public. A single individual, even one armed with the truth, is never in a strong position when challenging a large, entrenched interest. Because we owe them so much and must depend on their disclosures in fundamental ways, we must strengthen protection for whistleblowers and defend them aggressively.

Carousel image: Creative commons, Flickr / Steven Depolo

Share and enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • TwitThis
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • MisterWong
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • YahooBuzz
  • Print
  • email
Bea Edwards

About Bea Edwards

Bea Edwards is the executive director and international reform director of the Government Accountability Project in Washington, DC.

, , , , , ,

8 Responses to Whistleblowers: regulators of last resort

  1. Vasco de Castro P. da Silva 7 November 2013 at 2:37 pm #

    When you say that you will strenghten protection of whistleblowers and will defend them, I want to know what you can do for me, since, until now, you never did anything. As you know, I’m the author of a book – All in the Family…(The Corruption of Portugal and of the European Union Human Rights Commission and Court) – and a victim of all kind of persecutions as well as censorship. The Portuguese Government ows me more than 170 million euros and even if they haven’t paid a cent of the money that a then Portuguese State Bank stoled from me, the persecutions continue. I am a Portuguese and a Canadian citizen and I had to live Portugal. Even abroad, the Portuguese Consul in Montréal didn’t accept to revalidate my passport, since, as they said, I was considered a contumacious.
    What can you do to help me? You even have the book above mentionned, since I send it to you long time ago. Please responde to me.
    Vasco de Castro

  2. Michael Cavallo 8 November 2013 at 9:17 pm #

    Eloquent and on an issue that is critically important.

  3. Joe Collins 12 December 2013 at 2:35 am #

    And how to you propose to do that?

    Whistleblower retaliation follows a predictable path. There is even a manual to follow to destroy a whistleblower.

    What is needed is a process to “follow the money” back to the source in the same way the DEA follows the money from the drug dealer on the street back to the wholesalers and manufacturers and ultimately to the heads of the cartels.

  4. Iona Steinmeyer 31 December 2013 at 2:37 pm #

    Incredibly superior web page thanks so much for the time in writing the posts for all of us to learn about.

    http://www.IAvsNiR3v2IAvsNiR3v2.com/IAvsNiR3v2IAvsNiR3v2

  5. Kazuko Bermingham 4 January 2014 at 2:28 pm #

    Hiya! I simply would like to give an enormous thumbs up for the great info you’ve gotten right here on this post. I will probably be coming again to your weblog for extra soon.

  6. Jacalyn Osmond 5 January 2014 at 9:27 am #

    Whats up! I simply want to give an enormous thumbs up for the good information you have got right here on this post. I shall be coming again to your weblog for extra soon.

  7. Rosario Mynnerlyn 8 January 2014 at 3:41 am #

    After examine just a few of the weblog posts in your web site now, and I really like your method of blogging. I bookmarked it to my bookmark web site checklist and will likely be checking again soon. Pls try my website online as effectively and let me know what you think.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Whistleblowers: Regulators of Last Resort « BIZCATALYST360° - 7 November 2013

    […] via Whistleblowers: regulators of last resort | space for transparency. […]

Leave a Reply