The legislation on whistleblowing applies to all employees of public administrations who must be granted the protections provided for by law. Deep throats are therefore also allowed between military and law enforcement personnel: they can report any irregularities and alleged offenses without fear of the reaction of their hierarchical chain in the form of disciplinary measures. And this is true, as for everyone, even if the file is then closed.
From the Anac fine of 5 thousand euros
The Anac has in fact recognized the protections that the law attributes to whistleblowers of the public administration to a soldier of a Port Authority, who had filed a complaint, then filed, against his commander and who for this was punished with a disciplinary sanction. . The punishment was canceled from his CV because it was retaliatory while the ANAC sanctioned the commander for 5 thousand euros. In fact, the Anti-corruption Authority specifies that the legislation in defense of whistleblowing is applied “in a peaceful manner also to the military and police forces”.
Public officials obliged to report wrongdoing
Indeed, “as public officials, they are subject to the obligation of criminal reporting and entitled to report any other type of offense”. The soldier had been sanctioned with one day of “penalty delivery”, for having communicated alleged irregularities in the procedures for the transfer of personnel (including his). The Authority chaired by Giuseppe Busia received a complaint and carried out the verifications, then declaring the retaliatory nature of the measure, imposed “for having made strongly critical judgments and damaging the dignity of the body to which he belongs”. The reasoning that the protections for whistleblowers do not apply to the military “as they are subject to a specific and particular order” does not apply according to the Authority.
Public interest in ascertaining management of economic resources
In this case, the defensive thesis that the subordinate had “clearly pursued an exclusive personal interest” and that the sanction was aimed at protecting the integrity of the public administration was not valid. Motivating its decision, Anac reiterates “the public interest in knowing and soliciting an assessment on the management of the economic resources underlying the movement of military personnel, especially if possible due to tax damage”. “The fact that the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Court of Auditors has not initiated any proceedings, dismissing the complaint due to the lack of the elements constituting administrative responsibility, also takes a back seat”.
Incorrect disciplinary action
What matters is that the employee of the public administration “is reasonably convinced of the actual occurrence of the reported facts and of the identity of the author”, since this is essential to bring out possible corruption phenomena. Thus, the military administration and the whistleblower’s superiors had a duty to refrain from initiating disciplinary proceedings.