by Idowu Babajide

Though some loopholes can be identified in the Whistleblowers Act 2006, this write up doesn’t seek to criticise the Ghanaian version of the Act but rather impress it on the Nigerian National Assembly to have a similar law.

The level of profligacy in the public sector as exposed by one Mr. Nicholas Edwards, a staff in the Ministry of Aviation has brought to the fore the importance of whistle-blower’s in Nigeria. The Achilles heel of whistle-blowing in Nigeria is the absence of laws guiding whistle-blowing and guarding whistle-blowers. This might be one of the reasons Mr. Edwards who is considered as the “aviation ministry Edward Snowden” has been on the run since the report got to the public domain.

A whistle blower is defined in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (5^th Edition) as “someone who tells people in authority or the public about dishonest or illegal practices at the place where they work.” The risks that go with being a whistle blower cannot be over emphasised, hence the need to have a law that protects them. Whistleblower protection involves the enactment of laws and formulation of polices that are meant to protect anyone who exposes alleged wrongdoing which most times would take the form of fraud, corruption and mismanagement.

Whistleblower protection is generally not a new concept.  In the UK for instance, there is the Public Interest Protection Act 1998 which provides a framework of legal protection for individuals who disclose information so as to expose malpractice.  In Jamaica, there is the Protected Disclosures Act, 2011 which is based on the UK’s Public Interest Disclosure Act and protects whistleblowers in both private and public sectors. A similar law is also in South Africa, Ghana, and Uganda.

In a bid to understand the intent, meaning and workings of a Whistleblower law, the writer shall use a sister state, Ghana, as a case study. The Act, which is read as Whistle Blowers Act, 2006 has just 25 section and it is “an act to provide for the manner in which individuals may in the public interest disclose information that relates to unlawful or other illegal conduct or corrupt practices of others; to provide for the protection against victimization of persons who make these disclosures; to provide for a Fund to reward individuals who make the disclosures and to provide for related matters.”

Section 1 states information that would be protected under the Act. Some of such information include:

1. Information on an economic crime that has been committed, is about to be committed or is likely to be committed
2. Information that a person has not complied with the law or is in the process of breaking a law which imposes obligations on that person
3. Information that there is, has been or likely to be misappropriation, waste or mismanagement of public resources
4. That miscarriage of justice has been, is being or is likely to occur.

Section 3 sub section 3 states that a person who makes a disclosure of impropriety under the Act is referred to as a “whistle blower”. It is important to note that section 3 (1) lists the people that such information may be made to. They include: a Police Officer, the Attorney General, the Auditor General, the National Media Control Board, head of a recognised religious body, the office of the President, a member of the parliament, a staff of intelligence agencies, amongst others.

Section 12 of the Act is perhaps the most important aspect of that law. It deals with protection of whistle blowers. Section 12 (1) states that “a whistleblower shall not be subjected to victimization by the employer of the whistleblower or by a fellow employee or by another person because a disclosure has been made”. The Act further provides for remedies if a Whistle blower is victimized. Some of such remedies include: Filling a report to Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, Right of Action in Court for Victimization, Police Protection, Legal Assistance, Protection against Civil and Criminal Action and void employment contracts (where a contract of employment seeks to prevent the employee from making disclosure or from bringing an action in court or before an institution to claim relief or remedy in respect of victimization.

The last aspect of the Act which is worthy of note is the Whistleblower Reward Fund. The Act which provides for the establishment of a “Whistleblower Reward Fund” allows for payment of “a whistleblower whose disclosure results in the recovery of an amount of money….reward from the fund with ten percent of the amount recovered or the amount of money that the Attorney General shall in consultation with the Inspector – General of police determines”. This simply means that if the information doesn’t lead to a successful recovery of the stolen loot, the whistleblower will not get the reward.

Though some loopholes can be identified in the Whistleblowers Act 2006, this write up doesn’t seek to criticise the Ghanaian version of the Act but rather impress it on the Nigerian National Assembly to have a similar law. Though implementing laws is a major problem the Nigerian Government has, it is the belief that having a law such as the Whistleblowers Act will help strengthen institutions such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent and Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) and the workings of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. The National Assembly instead of wasting its time in establishing a superfluous Nigerian Financial Intelligence Centre which is already an arm in the E.FC.C, should channel such energy in the enactment of law protecting whistleblowers. Moreso, there seems to be no legal inhibition as illegally obtained evidence are admissible in Nigeria

Lastly, though the FOI Act allows anyone to request for information from any government agency or parastatal, it should be well noted that the information will only be requested for when “anyone” gets wind of any misnomer happening around. Therefore, it is the submission of the writer that the FOI Act can be better utilized if whistle blowing is promoted in Nigeria.

If Nigerians are really out to fix the problems that bedevil the country, we must think out of the box and look out for more stringent measures in fighting corruption, as desperate times call for desperate measures.

 

———————————————-

Op-ed pieces and contributions are the opinions of the writers only and do not represent the opinions of Y!/YNaija.