Search results

To analyze the recent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) whistleblower awards and to evaluate what issues may be important for in-house counsel in the future.

The article discusses the most recent whistleblower settlements and focuses on lessons learned for compliance.

The SEC continues to publicize substantial whistleblower awards in an effort to attract additional whistleblowers and gather information that may lead to successful enforcement actions. In addition, the CFTC, whose corresponding Whistleblower Program has been slow to issue awards has announced that it is ramping up its program.

Companies should ensure that they have vigorous compliance programs in place to prevent and detect potential securities violations and to respond immediately in order to mitigate penalties that may result from inadvertent violations.

This article identifies recent awards issued under Whistleblower Programs created under the Dodd-Frank Act and should be of interest to publicly traded companies and all entities regulated by the SEC and CFTC that may be targeted by potential whistleblowers.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the legislative framework that governs whistleblowing in the UAE.

The paper examines social perceptions and practical challenges related to the act of whistleblowing. It focuses on the effectiveness, limitations and implications of the current legal status of whistleblowing in the UAE.

The UAE does not have a unified legal framework that governs whistleblowing and whistleblower protections like in the case of the USA. Therefore, there is an urgent need for comprehensive federal regulations that will apply to all sectors across the entire UAE. Each emirate and economic zone can then model their whistleblowing regulations against the federal law to ensure consistency and uniformity in application. The UAE will also benefit from public awareness and education programs to address the conservative culture that discourages whistleblowing. Most importantly, corporate governance and culture are central to the success of existing laws considering the overreliance on organizations and employees.

The paper provides a robust and analytical discussion of the whistleblowing laws and regulations in the UAE to dissect current practices and implications for future practice.

When reporting wrongdoing internally, whistleblowers are confronted with the dilemma of weighing up their loyalty toward the organization (e.g., ethical standards) and their co-workers (e.g., the social norm of not snitching on peers). However, the role played by peers in the whistleblowing decision process and in the aftermath has rarely been addressed in existing reviews. We therefore perform a systematic review that identifies seven thematic clusters of peer factors, offering researchers an informative overview of (a) the peer factors that have been examined to influence the whistleblowing decision, and (b) the extent to which the whistleblower experiences adverse consequences from peers in the aftermath of whistleblowing. As peer factors seem to be important to explain and predict internal whistleblowing, researchers are encouraged to address in future works the research gaps our review unraveled.

The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act sets new whistleblowing standards for internal accountants and external auditors who fail to resolve differences internally with top management on financial reporting matters. Whistleblowers are eligible to receive a financial reward under Dodd-Frank if they “voluntarily” provide “original” information and meet other criteria. Interpretation 102-4 of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Code establishes reporting obligations for external auditors to meet the requirements of Dodd-Frank. The purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate the standards to better understand the whistleblowing process. A review of the literature identifies areas of concern in deciding whether to blow the whistle. The paper contributes to the literature by integrating thoughts, ideas, and issues raised by prior researchers and considerations specific to the whistleblowing process. The analysis results in the proposal of specific unanswered questions about the process that can guide future researchers.

Whistleblowing plays a crucial role in revealing organizational misconduct and systemic corruption in industry and government. This paper investigates changing practices of whistleblower activism, with particular reference to the role of solidarity and the increased role of support networks. Many modern whistleblower disclosures have revealed gaping flaws in the system of global governance related to a range of important social and economic issues, such as tax evasion, global mass surveillance, the use of torture and illegal wars of aggression. All these forms of systemic corruption are reliant on the use of secrecy havens to conceal the abuse from public scrutiny and democratic oversight. Counter-hegemonic social movements that oppose forms of systemic corruption can find important allies in those whistleblowers, who leak vital information about misconduct and corruption to the public. In this paper, we argue that there is a clear relationship of mutual support between whistleblowing and activist social movements, both in the process of whistleblowing and in furthering the campaigns of the social movements themselves. We theorize this, unpacking the processes and dynamics underlying the relationship, and offering a framework for analysis. The paper concludes with a discussion of the changing role of whistleblower activism and support networks in undertaking social reform and counter-hegemonic practice.

Given the conflicting attitudes that people have toward those who report wrongdoing and a lack of empirical research specifically examining subsequent hiring, it is an open question as to whether accounting professionals would want to work with former whistleblowers. The authors examine this question using an experimental design, in which participants evaluate an employment candidate before and after the person discloses having been a whistleblower. Four manipulations of whistleblowing are used in both a within-subjects and a between-subjects manipulation. The authors’ results demonstrate that accounting professionals’ intentions to recommend a candidate for hire decrease after they are informed that a strong candidate has a whistleblowing past. A candidate is viewed most negatively, however, when discovering malfeasance and electing not to blow the whistle internally. Moreover, when the whistle is blown internally and the superior takes no action, the candidate who remained silent and chose not to continue to push the issue is viewed more negatively than the candidate who proceeded to blow the whistle externally. Although a candidate having a whistleblowing past appears to pose a cautionary signal in the interview process, participants reacted more harshly when the candidate failed to act or lacked the durable moral courage to see the matter through to completion.

At a time when governmental corruption seems rife and administrations grow ever more secretive, the whistleblower is a crucial resource in journalism’s attempts to make accountable those who wield power. Yet despite legislation that is meant to protect employees and officials who expose wrongdoing, a governmental “war on whistleblowers” has made the hazards faced by many whistleblowers increasingly grim. This chapter explores the role of the journalist/whistleblower collaboration in disclosing important, but sensitive, information involving national security. In discussing case studies of those who have braved the government’s anger, we examine not only the circumstances of these breaches, but also their political and legal repercussions.

The purpose of this paper is to critically analyse the extent of protection available for whistleblowers in South African criminal cases.

This paper first provides a brief background of crime in South Africa and argues that the concept of the whistleblower is just a buss word or collective noun. The methodology of this paper consists of a literature review of whistleblowers and relevant laws that can be used to protect whistleblowers in South African criminal cases.

This paper concludes that the existing law as primarily contained in the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides appropriate protection for whistleblowers in South African criminal cases.

Whistleblowers provide information on criminal, civil and disciplinary wrongdoings. This study focuses on the protection of whistleblowers pursuant to mainly the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977.

The originality of this paper lies in the approach to the handling of whistleblowers in South African criminal cases. This is the first research done with the emphasis on the use of mainly the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 to protect whistleblowers in South African criminal cases. The contribution of the study is that, by using this approach, it can provide protection and save lives, and it may enhance the willingness of whistleblowers to blow the whistle, which will be beneficial to the community of South Africa as a whole.

To explain a recent enforcement action by the USA Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) whereby the SEC brought its first enforcement action for retaliation against a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank).

Explains the SEC’s recent enforcement action under Dodd-Frank, highlighting the efforts that a company undertook with respect to continuing to employ a whistleblower after potentially fraudulent activity was reported and discusses practical problems faced by such companies when trying to simultaneously investigate potential wrong-doing without being seen as retaliating against a whistleblower.

Through this enforcement action, the SEC has demonstrated a willingness to bring cases to enforce Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provisions even though Dodd-Frank does not expressly grant it such enforcement authority.

Companies must have a strong culture of compliance and a strong policy encouraging whistleblowers to report concerns internally if at all possible. Once the whistleblower has reported to the SEC, a company will need to maintain the status quo with respect to the whistleblower.

Practical guidance from attorneys with experience with the SEC and whistleblower actions.