FIRST.- To guarantee a high level of protection for whistleblowers who report violations of EU legislation, which may be from private companies, but above all from public administrations. On the issue of corruption and transparency, public administrations have put all possible obstacles in the way of their transparency, in no way in line with Sir Robert Peel’s principles. They have used the same impediments to launch all the mechanisms they had against whistleblowers. And the judges have allowed and encouraged this in Spain. As a result, from now on, the Judiciary is also under the rule of the Directive.
SECOND.- To establish secure and comprehensive channels of information within an organization and to public authorities. Channels whose responsibility is directly attributed to their investigators, who will be independent at all times.
THIRD.- To protect informants against dismissal and denigrating or degrading acts, and other forms of retaliation by reversing the burden of proof, turning these acts into a criminal action.
FOURTH.- Once the mechanism has been established, those who have knowledge of the commission of conduct that may be allegedly criminal are obliged to report it to an internal Complaints Channel. Only when they do not trust the internal Whistleblower Channel, will they be obliged to go through external (public) channels.
FIFTH.- The obligation to denounce is for those who know. Employees (including national/local level officials), volunteers and trainees, interns, non-executive members, shareholders, etc.
SIXTH.- Companies will have a period of three months to inform the complainant and process the complaints in accordance with a previously known internal procedure (with the possibility, in duly justified cases, of extending the period to six months for external channels).