Skip Navigation

Ensuring Better Transparency: How Latvia is Working to Protect Whistleblowers

Asegurando una mejor transparencia: El trabajo de Letonia hacia la protección de denunciantes

This blog is part of a series from students of the Institut de Sciences Politiques de Paris who interviewed reformers working on initiatives recognized by the OGP Leaders Network. Read the series here

Within the backdrop of creating more open communities, the issue of enlisting regular citizens to speak up and denounce misconduct in the public and private sectors has progressively increased. In Latvia, the subject of whistleblower protection first came with the prosecution of Ilmārs Poikāns, who was convicted for leaking the salary increases of Latvian public company executives during a national economic recession and welfare cuts. The whistleblowing issue was twofold at the time: a lack of citizen awareness on the need to blow the whistle on corruption cases; and the lack of a specific legal framework protecting such actions. In October 2018, the Latvian Parliament adopted a law to strengthen the protection of whistleblowers and to consolidate reporting mechanisms in cases of misconduct. The new legislation encompasses the protection of anonymity and prevents retribution for filing those complaints. 

A growing cultural change

Before the Whistleblower Protection Act’s adoption in Latvia, the role of whistleblowers in leaking wrongdoing or malfeasance in the workplace was not very well known. It was also clearly not recognized as a necessary action in the country’s customs.

To support the law’s implementation, Transparency International and Latvia’s State Chancellery are conducting innovative initiatives to better educate and communicate on the role of whistleblowers at large. In order to introduce real cultural change, grassroots actions have been critical in raising citizen awareness on the importance of whistleblowers for opening up societies. Transparency International Latvia (Delna) and the anticorruption movement Atkrāpies! organized an exhibition on whistleblowing at the National Library in Riga from September to October, 2017. It showcased nine international stories on how whistleblowing initiated positive changes. Moreover, an information campaign had been organized country-wide on whistleblower protection, and Latvia hosted an international conference on the issue.

Even though the first steps towards bringing whistleblowing to the debate appeared arduous, the way citizens see those acts has seen concrete improvements since the days of the Soviet Union.

A successful multi-layer partnership

The innovative initiative gathered a wide array of actors from civil society, businesses, Parliament and the public administration.

At the outset, passing the initiative proved to be difficult. According to Inese Kušķe of Latvia’s State Chancellery, a few segments of the Latvian society were reluctant at first, especially businesses and public administrations. Nonetheless, after an inclusive lawmaking process and a change of mindset from certain stakeholders (i.e. the corporate world), the initiative was adopted without any outcry. Such synergies acted as a first step towards instituting a real societal change. Indeed, if the law would have been debated today in 2021, it would have probably been even more smoothly adopted.

What challenges and stakes lie ahead?

For Transparency International, the main challenge is to increase reporting figures in the private sector. As Inese Taurina – head of Transparency International Latvia – points out, annual activity reports show that whistleblowing notifications are still mainly concentrated within the public spheres. For this reason, Delna is currently working on a handbook to provide guidelines on whistleblowing targeted at small and mid-size enterprises.

In addition, there is also the challenge of creating additional compensation and incentive mechanisms for blowing the whistle. Per their request, whistleblowers may today receive a small compensation for moral and non-material losses on the basis of court decisions, but more could certainly be achieved in this area. A financial incentive could have been integrated into the 2018 Act to provide courts with an added legal footing to grant compensations. On the model of Lithuania, Latvia could have also created a government reward for people blowing the whistle in the public interest. Such a reward would only amount to a few thousand euros, but would most likely contribute to a more systemic change towards how whistleblowing is treated in the long term.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Content

Thumbnail for Citizen Eyes and Ears on the Government: Kaduna State, Nigeria Challenges and Solutions

Citizen Eyes and Ears on the Government: Kaduna State, Nigeria

Overspending and under-delivered infrastructure projects are among the symptoms of government vulnerability to corruption. Learn about Kaduna State "Eyes and Ears" project, which ensures that community funds are properly managed…

Thumbnail for Five Government Innovations Recognized for their Work to Open up Government

Five Government Innovations Recognized for their Work to Open up Government

Five open government reforms from Latvia, Mexico, New Zealand, the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina and the state of Kaduna, Nigeria have been recognized ...

Thumbnail for Faces of Open Government – Inese Kušķe Champions

Faces of Open Government – Inese Kušķe

Protecting Whistleblowers in Latvia

Open Government Partnership