Measuring Whistleblowing Perceptions among the Civil Service of the Republic of Kosovo

Abstract

In 2018, the Parliament of the Republic of Kosovo approved the Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers, setting up the foundations of the whistleblower protection system for the public and private sectors in the country. In line with the international principles for drafting legislation for the protection of whistleblowers, the law provides three channels for reporting wrongdoing and grants protection against any form of retaliation for whistleblowers. Noting the absence of institutional data on whistleblowing in the public sector, for this research article, a survey was implemented with individual members of civil service in Kosovo (n=400), during the period from September to November 2019, to collect primary data related to factors incentivizing and / or discouraging the decision to whistleblow. Data were collected at the national and local levels of state administration, as per the scope of the definition of the civil service by Kosovo legislation. In this contribution, research results reveal that the protection against any form of retaliation guaranteed by the law is not sufficient for members of civil service in Kosovo to support the decision to whistleblow, as concerns arise for the security and physical integrity of their respective family members. Law does not provide financial incentives for civil servants to whistleblow. Data reveal that a satisfactory level of trust is missing on organizational indicators such as trust in the responsible officer, protection of data confidentiality and anonymity, across different levels of categories of civil service. In line with the concerns voiced by members of civil service and international standards for whistleblower protection, the following actionable recommendations are proposed to advance the whistleblowing system in Kosovo: 1) Improve the provision of training for members of civil service on whistleblowing legislation, organizational procedures, whistleblower protection, and rights; 2) Establish strategies to support employees for whistleblowing. Such strategies would include programs enabling whistleblowers access to professional services such as stress management, counseling, and legal services; 3) Enhance security measures for the physical integrity of whistleblowers and their respective family members; 4) Establish incentives to encourage whistleblowing, such as financial rewards.

Whistleblowing dan Korupsi Pada Sektor Publik: A Systematic Review

“…Korupsi memunculkan tantangan kompleks bagi organisasi sektor publik dan menghambat beroperasinya administrasi publik di seluruh dunia (Baljija & Rustemi, 2021;Graycar, 2020). Korupsi menjadi sebuah perkara global yang tidak mengenal negara, budaya, ras, dan kelas sosial (Gholami & Salihu, 2019).…”

“…Organisasi-organisasi internasional seperti World Bank, The United Nations, The Council of Europe, The European Commission, dan sebagainya, menegaskan bahwa whistleblowing penting diterapkan dalam sektor publik sebagai alat, mekanisme, sistem dan aktivitas mencegah korupsi (Baljija & Rustemi, 2021). Whistleblowing merupakan pengungkapan mengenai tindakan ilegal, tidak bermoral atau tindakan melawan hukum yang dilakukan oleh seseorang didalam organisasi, seperti mantan anggota atau anggota saat ini dibawah pengawasan atasan mereka, kepada orang atau organisasi yang mungkin dapat memengaruhi tindakan (Near & Miceli, 1985).…”

“…Lebih lanjut, peneliti tersebut menerangkan whistleblower di sektor publik Amerika Serikat, menerima insentif atau hadiah sebagai imbalan atas pelaporan yang dilakukan terhadap pelanggaran yang mengakibatkan denda didasarkan pada Undang-Undang Dodd-Frank. Program pemberian imbalan finansial bagi pelapor pada sektor publik di Amerika Serikat adalah SEC Whistleblower Reward Program (Baljija & Rustemi, 2021).…”

Evaluating the effectiveness of whistleblower protection: A new index

“…The survey is an output of the doctoral research of one of the authors of this article (Kaciku Baljija, 2020). The data were originally gathered as part of Kaçiku Baljija (2020)’s doctoral research, then later published in a journal article (Kaçiku Baljija and Rustemi, 2021).…”

“…Data presented in Table 4 reveal a considerable lack of trust among respondents in the protection offered by the LPW. “Respondents express a considerable degree of uncertainty about the trust in the responsible official, and above 40% of respondents are not sure how the data confidentiality and anonymity will be ensured, while 30% of respondents believe that such data will be misused” (Kaçiku Baljija and Rustemi, 2021, p.152).…”