The Dutch Whistleblower Protection Act

What are the rules outlined in the Dutch Whistleblower Protection Act?

• Where a reporting person qualifies for protection and suffers a disadvantage, the employer must demonstrate that the disadvantage is unrelated to the report.  
• There are stricter requirements around channels, intake and processing of reports, including receipt confirmation after a report is submitted, clear feedback deadlines and an obligation to maintain records in line with the GDPR. 
• Reporters can choose to report directly to the House for Whistleblowers or another competent authority, without first reporting internally. 
• Both oral and written reporting facilities must be provided for reporters. 
• The scope of whistleblower protections is expanded to include anyone working within an organization. This includes self-employed workers, volunteers, trainees, contractors and suppliers.
• Each employer with 50 or more workers must have its own internal reporting channel, even within a group. A group-wide channel can be used in addition, but not instead. 
• Adopting or changing the internal reporting procedure requires consent from the works council, or the employee representation body where there is no works council 
• Wrongdoing covers actual or likely breaches of EU law, as well as acts or omissions that put the public interest at risk. The suspicion must be based on reasonable grounds. 
• Supervisory and sanctioning provisions for the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority have not yet entered into force. An amendment bill is being prepared to establish an operational enforcement framework.

Three ways the Dutch Whistleblowing Act differs from the EU Directive

The Dutch Whistleblower Protection Act implements the EU Directive, but it differs from it in three main ways.    
 

First, the Dutch Act only protects reports where the public interest is at stake.

The EU Directive protects reports of breaches of EU law without this condition. In practice, this means that individual workplace disputes, such as a personal conflict with a manager, are not covered by the Dutch Act. Transparency International and others have criticized this requirement.  

Second, the Dutch Act covers more than EU law. 

It also protects people who report suspected wrongdoing under Dutch national law, as long as the public interest is at stake. These reporters receive the same protection as those who report breaches of EU law. 
   

Third, the Netherlands has nine authorities that can receive external reports, rather than one.

Each authority covers its own area, including financial services, healthcare, data protection, competition and consumer protection, nuclear safety, and food and product safety. Reports that do not fall under any of these authorities can be made to the House for Whistleblowers.  
 
Any interested party, including employees and works councils, can already ask the sub-district court to order an employer to set up an internal reporting procedure that meets the law’s requirements. However, the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority does not yet have the power to supervise employers or impose sanctions.   

The government is preparing an amendment bill that would give the Authority these powers and require employers to accept anonymous reports. The planned rules focus on internal reporting procedures, the information employers must provide, and protecting the identity of people who report. The final requirements, sanctions and start date will depend on the legislative process.