A study coordinated by the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) identified weaknesses in public programs for collecting complaints against corruption nationwide socalled whistleblowing, as this type of program is known internationally.
These weaknesses include:
- Lack of complaint management systems
- limited acceptance of anonymous records
- Lack of a process for receiving reports of retaliation
The survey, consisting of a 36item questionnaire, received nearly 300 responses from federal agencies, state governments, town halls and even city councils and the judiciary. The conclusions led to the creation of a document submitted for public consultation last Monday (11) with proposals on the subject.
The document lists 11 “critical situations” on the topic based on the data collected. One of these is the management of reporting channels. According to the study, the bodies that receive the complaints often lose the information.
“It draws attention to the answers given to this research question, to the number of cases in which respondents reported not having data, either because there were no systems to manage information, because there was no way to to extract data, or because the information itself was not there. due to a change in leadership,” the document states.
“All situations (…) highlight several aspects related to the fragility of reporting channels in terms of the management and protection of information,” the text explains.
The document highlights the lack of structures designed to address possible retaliation against whistleblowers as a critical situation. Based on the answers, the diagnosis is that there is a pattern that includes:
- Lack of process for receiving reports of retaliation;
- Lack of procedures to analyze reports of retaliation and take action to stop the retaliatory action;
- Lack of data on the occurrence of reports of retaliation and the results of their investigation;
- Lack of mechanisms to address harm caused by retaliation; It is
- Lack of management campaigns to prevent retaliation.
Citing research on the topic, the report notes that “the retaliation and reprisals that whistleblowers face have a serious impact on their lives” and that “these potential harms are in addition to the risk that the facts will not be investigated , represent the main obstacle to greater collaboration among individuals to improve public administration and even corporate governance.”
The CGU report points to R$202 billion in accounting errors by the Bolsonaro government
The document deals particularly with the judiciary and the public prosecutor’s office with questions such as the automatic confidentiality of the complainant and the obligation of the complainant to provide evidence. In the latter case, it is concluded that this fee is unreasonable and the rules need to be adjusted.
“It is important to emphasize that it is not the responsibility of whistleblowers to prove their statements, as they pass on valuable information about breaches of duty or misconduct to the relevant authorities within the framework of their organisation. The competence and investigative capacity lies with the reporting channel or its reporting apparatus. Investigation,” the text says.
Another critical situation concerns the restriction of anonymous reports. The study points out that this tool “sometimes does not find wide acceptance” and mentions rules of the National Judicial Council and the National Council of Public Ministry on the subject.
Fabiano Angélico, a specialist in transparency and integrity and researcher at the University of Lugano, Switzerland, sees the anonymous report as one of the most relevant points of the study. According to him, anonymous registration can be a way to overcome cultural resistance to the act of reporting.
“Unfortunately, our societies look at institutions a bit like, ‘You have to have your group to protect yourself in a certain way,’ right? [Se proteger] the violence of the institutions themselves,” he says. “In my opinion, the main difficulty in the further development of this legislation is cultural, it is first a matter of overcoming this barrier,” says Angélico.
Angélico also points out the relevance of feedback mechanisms for whistleblowers on the results of their complaints. For him, this is necessary to give the system reliability this is also a point that is addressed in the text.
“Skilled and properly selected staff means institutions are committed to the health and integrity of the reporting channel,” the document says. “If suspicion hovers over the agent when information is leaked, the entire channel is compromised, resulting in a loss of reputation and therefore damage to whistleblowing policy due to lack of credibility.”
For Angélico, the document provides an important portrait of the institutional structures affecting the issue, but political will remains a predominant success factor.
“The people who really make decisions are the political elites, so the secret is to create an institutional framework that can cope with all the challenges. “It takes time, you have to be credible, you have to be legitimized, you have to have a dialogue with them.” Society,” he analyzes.