We just had an experience with a whistleblower, and we've had some in the past. During this election, a question was brought up with a Regional Affairs candidate regarding his role in a scandal that took place a month ago that was pretty....not kind. 
In that vein, I'd like to propose a Whistleblower Protection Act.

 

Whistleblower Protection Act

An act to protect whistleblowers from outing and repercussions

1. Defining a Whistleblower

(1)  A whistleblower will be defined as an individual who reports concerning behavior performed by a group or individual to an official of the Coalition or the Assembly of the South Pacific, in good faith.

(2)  An anonymous whistleblower will be defined as an individual who performs the actions of a whistleblower anonymously.

2. Protection of Whistleblowers

(1)  Whistleblowers have the right to report on concerning behavior without fear of political or legal repercussions from the Coalition of the South Pacific, any organization within the Coalition of the South Pacific, or any foreign entities.  

(2) Anonymous whistleblowers have the right to their anonymity. 

(3) If an anonymous whistleblower grants permission to an individual to share their identity with another individual, the government of the Coalition of the South Pacific, an organization, foreign entity, or the general public, the individual who shared the identity has the right to share the information without legal repercussions.  

 

Criminal Code
 
An act laying out crimes against the Coalition and their punishments

1. Crimes

...

(11) Bribery shall be defined as the receiving or offering of undue support by or to any individual in order to influence behavior that the recipient would otherwise not alter.

(12) Vexatious Charges shall be defined as the filing of criminal charges against another player despite the filing party's knowledge that said charges were meritless, frivolous, repetitive, and/or burdensome.

(13) Conduct violations shall be defined as breaking in-game NationStates rules.

(14) Whistleblower outing shall be defined as revealing the identity of an anonymous whistleblower with intent to cause harm to the whistleblower. 

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

(This post was last modified: 08-24-2020, 10:19 PM by North Prarie.)

Reply

So ... I can't help but feel like this is a bit of overkill.

It's one thing if we want to make it so a whistleblower can't be retaliated against/dismissed from a post, but it's another to suggest that "outing" a whistleblower is akin to espionage.  

If a member of the government would expose a whistleblower as a form of retaliation — sure. But,if someone else just happens to let it slip that the person is a whistleblower — that's a different situation.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

So ... I can't help but feel like this is a bit of overkill.

It's one thing if we want to make it so a whistleblower can't be retaliated against/dismissed from a post, but it's another to suggest that "outing" a whistleblower is akin to espionage.  

If a member of the government would expose a whistleblower as a form of retaliation — sure. But,if someone else just happens to let it slip that the person is a whistleblower — that's a different situation.

Good point - I changed it so it requires intent to cause repercussions, and took out the 'personal' part regarding your post on Discord.

Edit: I've also changed the wording from 'illicit' to 'concerning'.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

(This post was last modified: 06-06-2020, 05:46 PM by North Prarie.)

Reply

(1)  A whistleblower will be defined as an individual who reports concerning behavior preformed by a group or individual to another individual.

This needs to be reworked. Someone can only be considered a whistleblower if they are doing to someone with power in an attempt to fix something; if they are just telling a friend about questionable behavior, that wouldn't be a whistleblower — nor should it have protection.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

This needs to be reworked. Someone can only be considered a whistleblower if they are doing to someone with power in an attempt to fix something; if they are just telling a friend about questionable behavior, that wouldn't be a whistleblower — nor should it have protection.

I suggest we change 'another individual' to 'a person with authority.' We'd need another section to define "person with authority' - I guess it would be different depending on the identity of the whistleblower, so (for example) a Cabinet member raising concerns with another Cabinet member wouldn't be considered whistleblowing, but a legislator raising concerns with a Cabinet member would.

I also think there needs to be a 'good faith' element to the act of whistleblowing, so that you're not entitled to whistleblower protections if your concerns are not genuinely held.

Finally I suggest that outing an anonymous whistleblower, if it is to be a crime at all, should be a separate offence rather than considered an act of espionage.

Reply

Are there any historical examples in TSP where such an act would have been necessary or beneficial? Have we had whistleblowers who have been penalised or otherwise faced negative consequences for their actions?

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

This needs to be reworked. Someone can only be considered a whistleblower if they are doing to someone with power in an attempt to fix something; if they are just telling a friend about questionable behavior, that wouldn't be a whistleblower — nor should it have protection.

I suggest we change 'another individual' to 'a person with authority.' We'd need another section to define "person with authority' - I guess it would be different depending on the identity of the whistleblower, so (for example) a Cabinet member raising concerns with another Cabinet member wouldn't be considered whistleblowing, but a legislator raising concerns with a Cabinet member would.

I also think there needs to be a 'good faith' element to the act of whistleblowing, so that you're not entitled to whistleblower protections if your concerns are not genuinely held. 

 
Good ideas- I have edited the bill to make it a government member, and I added a good faith part.
I didn't make it 'person with authority' because that could be hard to define and lead to loopholes.

Finally I suggest that outing an anonymous whistleblower, if it is to be a crime at all, should be a separate offence rather than considered an act of espionage. 

 
This is what I thought, too - I'll raise this to the Assembly to provide their reasoning for it to be considered under espionage, as I had made it under espionage under the suggestion of Roavin in the leg lounge.
 

(1)  A whistleblower will be defined as an individual who reports concerning behavior preformed by a group or individual to another individual.

This needs to be reworked. Someone can only be considered a whistleblower if they are doing to someone with power in an attempt to fix something; if they are just telling a friend about questionable behavior, that wouldn't be a whistleblower — nor should it have protection. 

Well, any whistleblower could be considered someone attempting to fix something - they're intended to 'fix', or stop, the bad behavior.
 

Are there any historical examples in TSP where such an act would have been necessary or beneficial? Have we had whistleblowers who have been penalised or otherwise faced negative consequences for their actions?

I don't think so, but just because it's never happened doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

Are there any historical examples in TSP where such an act would have been necessary or beneficial? Have we had whistleblowers who have been penalised or otherwise faced negative consequences for their actions?

The closest example which remotely comes close is MoNC but that was settled because of the PM at the time.

Admiral General of the South Pacific

Reply

I'll do a sort of bump on this, because I think this act could be a welcome addition.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

I'm generally supportive of these proposals. However, I feel somewhat uncertain whether revealing a whistleblower's identity should be classified under espionage given how serious the label is.

Admiral General of the South Pacific

Reply