| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 551.25 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
O papel das denúncias tem vindo a ganhar uma importância crescente na sociedade. O modo como as instituições democráticas respondem a este canal de informação é determinante para a ação do Estado de Direito Democrático e, em última instância, confere legitimidade aos poderes das suas instituições.
Por ser incentivado, exige, consequentemente, um regime legal que estatua o modus operandi do denunciante (no que toca às exigências formais de uma denúncia) e lhe garanta a necessária proteção (na sua pessoa e património). Nos termos do tradicional instituto do Whistleblowing, apenas o trabalhador-denunciante é merecedor desta tutela. Tal compreende-se face à assunção de que estes têm uma posição privilegiada para tomar conhecimento de condutas danosas para o interesse público, acompanhada de uma posição de vulnerabilidade e dependência económica da pessoa que denunciam; são estes condicionalismos que justificam a proteção perante retaliações particularmente lesivas. Hoje, estes pressupostos permanecem intactos. No entanto, estão desajustados da atual realidade. Não são apenas os trabalhadores-denunciantes que sofrem retaliações, não são apenas as retaliações laborais que exigem proteção, e a informação, considerada significativa e digna de sustento, poderá ser obtida por inúmeras vias e por qualquer cidadão.
Tendo em mente a transposição da Diretiva (UE) 2019/1937 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 23 de outubro de 2019, relativa à proteção das pessoas que denunciam violações do direito da União, exponho os fundamentos para adaptar o âmbito de aplicação pessoal deste regime, de modo a tutelar o trabalhador-denunciante e o cidadão-denunciante. Ademais, descortino as exigências impostas a uma denúncia para que esta seja considerada operante. Estes requisitos são a garantia do equilíbrio entre o funcionamento da sociedade e as liberdades individuais de cada um.
The role of Whistleblowing has been gaining an increasing importance in our society. The way in which democratic institutions respond to this information channel is decisive for the action of the Democratic Rule of Law and, ultimately, gives legitimacy to the powers of their institutions. As it is encouraged, it also requires a legal regime that establishes the whistleblower's modus operandi (regarding the formal requirements of a complaint) and guarantees its’ necessary protection (in its person and property). Under the traditional Whistleblowing institute, only the worker-whistleblower is worthy of this protection. This is understood in view of the assumption that only they have a privileged position to learn about harmful conduct to the public interest, accompanied by a position of vulnerability and economic dependence on the person they report; these constraints justify their protection against particularly damaging retaliation. Today, these assumptions remain intact. However, they are out of step with the current reality. It is not just workers-whistleblowers who suffer retaliation, it is not just job retaliation that requires protection, and the information, considered significant and worthy of support, can be obtained by countless means and by any citizen. Bearing in mind the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report violations of Union law, I set out the grounds for adapting the personal scope of this regime, in order to protect the worker-whistleblower and the citizen-whistleblower. In addition, I unveil the requirements imposed on a complaint in order for it to be considered operative. These are a guarantee of a balance between the functioning of society and the individual freedoms of each one.
The role of Whistleblowing has been gaining an increasing importance in our society. The way in which democratic institutions respond to this information channel is decisive for the action of the Democratic Rule of Law and, ultimately, gives legitimacy to the powers of their institutions. As it is encouraged, it also requires a legal regime that establishes the whistleblower's modus operandi (regarding the formal requirements of a complaint) and guarantees its’ necessary protection (in its person and property). Under the traditional Whistleblowing institute, only the worker-whistleblower is worthy of this protection. This is understood in view of the assumption that only they have a privileged position to learn about harmful conduct to the public interest, accompanied by a position of vulnerability and economic dependence on the person they report; these constraints justify their protection against particularly damaging retaliation. Today, these assumptions remain intact. However, they are out of step with the current reality. It is not just workers-whistleblowers who suffer retaliation, it is not just job retaliation that requires protection, and the information, considered significant and worthy of support, can be obtained by countless means and by any citizen. Bearing in mind the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report violations of Union law, I set out the grounds for adapting the personal scope of this regime, in order to protect the worker-whistleblower and the citizen-whistleblower. In addition, I unveil the requirements imposed on a complaint in order for it to be considered operative. These are a guarantee of a balance between the functioning of society and the individual freedoms of each one.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Denúncia Denunciante Interesse público Direitos fundamentais Diretiva Trabalhador-denunciante Cidadão-denunciante Whistleblowing Whistleblower Public interest Fundamental rights Directive Private individuals Worker-whistleblower Citizen-whistleblower