Silence becomes cowardice when

occasion demands speaking out the

whole truth and acting accordingly.
Mahatma Gandhi Nothing strengthens
authority so much as silence.
Leonardo da Vinci

WHISTLEBLOWIN
G
In Human Resource
Management
PROJECT REPORT

Shobit Chakraborty
BBA(H)
Institute of International Trade(247)
West Bengal University of Technology

A PROJECT REPORT ON

WHISTLEBLOWING
BY
SHOBIT CHAKRABORTY
IN PARTIAL FULLFILLMENT OF
UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE (247)

WEST BENGAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
KOLKATA
(2011-2014)

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that project report titled Whistleblowing is a bonafide work carried
out by Shobit Chakraborty of BBA (H) of INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
(247) for fulfillment of BBA (H) course of WEST BENGAL UNIVERSITY OF
TECHNOLOGY, Kolkata.

Director

Guide

Date:

Place:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A project report is a golden opportunity for learning and self-development. I consider
myself very lucky and honored to have so many wonderful people lead me through in
completion of this project.
Mrs.Arundhati Das Chatterjee, HR Department monitored my progress and gave
all the best necessary guidance one can ever give for the completion of this project. I
choose this moment to acknowledge her contribution gratefully.
Mr.Nilay Chatterjee whose patience I have probably tested to the limit. He was
always so involved in the entire process, shared his knowledge, and encouraged me to
think. Thank you, Dear Sir.
I would like to thank Dr.D.R Agarwal for his efforts and help provided me to get
such an excellent opportunity.
Last but not the least there were so many who shared valuable information that
helped in the successful completion of this project.

Shobit Chakraborty
Roll.no: 24705011031
Registration no.:112472010031 0f 2011-2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The topic of this project is very interesting specially because in India Whistleblowers are
usually bushed down. To know who are Whistleblowers and what do they do we need to
understand simply that it could be anyone who protests against a wrongdoing, it could be
you or me.
The main objectives of this project is to show the various situations a
Whistleblower has to face and what are the ultimate outcomes for blowing the Whistle
with the aid of research data and case studies that would help one better understand not
only the situation of the world with regards to Whistleblowing but also from the point of
view of our very own country. This project looks at Whistleblowing from three varied
angles namely bullying, harassment and fraud.
The findings show that in most of the cases Whistleblowers have been punished or
have been laid off from the point of view of organization though there are also cases
discussed where the Whistleblower has been rewarded. But yet that is not enough.
This project also tries to go to the ultimate depth with regards to the topic and
combines research data with case studies to provide better understanding of aspects of all
the various industries for example Information Technology, Pharmacy etc. and shows
instances of Whistleblowing facts and data about every possible industry.
Every data is reliable and collected from experienced sources and it is expected to
fulfill the readers expectations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUBJECT

PAGE

1. WHISTLEBLOWER

2. TYPES OF WRONGDOINGS

3. RAISING A CONCERN

4. GRIEVANCE MAY LEAD TO EXTERNAL WHISTLEBLOWING

5. WHISTLEBLOWERS POSITION

6. SAFETY AT WORKPLACE

7. POSITIONAL HIERARCHY AND WHISTLEBLOWING

8. WHISTLEBLOWING WHEN CO-WORKER IS WRONGDOER

10

9. WHISTLEBLOWING AND BULLYING

11

10. BULLYING: WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS

12

11. WHAT SHOULD ONE DO?

13

12. BULLYING IN INDIA: A CASE STUDY

14

13. WHISTLEBLOWING AND HARRASSMENT

15

14. HARRASSMENT: INDIAN LAW AND GUIDELINES

16

15. HARASSMENT IN INDIA: CASE STUDIES

17

16. WHISTLEBLOWINGS IMPACT: BULLYING AND HARRASSMENT

22

17. WHISTLEBLOWING AND FRAUD

23

18. TYPES OF FRAUD

24

19. FRAUD IN INDIA: CASE STUDIES

25

20. WIKILEAKS: WE LEAK SECRETS

28

1. WHISTLEBLOWER
A whistleblower (whistle-blower or whistle blower) is a person who exposes misconduct, alleged
dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization. The alleged misconduct may be classified in
many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest,
such as fraud, health and safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations
internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law
enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).
If an employee has knowledge of or a concern of illegal or dishonest fraudulent activity, the employee is
to contact his/her immediate supervisor or the Human Resources Director. The employee must exercise
sound judgment to avoid baseless allegations. An employee who intentionally files a false report of
wrongdoing will be subject to discipline up to and including termination.
Whistleblower protections are provided in two important areas:
Confidentiality: Insofar as possible, the confidentiality of the whistleblower will be maintained.
However, identity may have to be disclosed to conduct a thorough investigation, to comply with
the law and to provide accused individuals their legal rights of defense.
Retaliation: The Company will not retaliate against a whistleblower. This includes, but is not
limited to, protection from retaliation in the form of an adverse employment action such as
termination, compensation decreases, or poor work assignments and threats of physical harm and
against retaliation Any whistleblower who believes he/she is being retaliated against must
contact the Human Resources Director immediately
STEPS INVOLVED IN WHISTLEBLOWING
Typically whistleblowing involves 5 stages:

BASICALLY THEY ARE OF TWO TYPES

INTERNAL: Most whistleblowers are internal whistleblowers, who report misconduct on a fellow
employee or superior within their company. One of the most interesting questions with respect to
internal whistleblowers is why and under what circumstances people will either act on the spot to stop
illegal and otherwise unacceptable behavior or report it. There are some reasons to believe that people
are more likely to take action with respect to unacceptable behavior, within an organization, if there are
complaint systems that offer not just options dictated by the planning and control organization, but a
choice of options for absolute confidentiality.

Instance of Internal Whistleblowing: Satyendra Dubey, was one of those rare young men

who was completely and uncomplicatedly honest. He didn't know he was a hero. An engineer from
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur and working for National Highway Authority of India
probably never knew the word but died for simply doing the right thing. Gunned down by the mafia
in Gaya on early November 27th morning, nearly a year after he had complained of corruption on
the Golden Quadrilateral project to the Prime Minister's office. Knowing the dangers that surround
honest people bucking the whole corrupt system

EXTERNAL: External whistleblowers, however, report misconduct to outside persons or entities.

In these cases, depending on the information's severity and nature, whistleblowers may report the
misconduct to lawyers, the media, law enforcement or watchdog agencies, or other local, state, or
federal agencies. In some cases, external whistleblowing is encouraged by offering monetary reward.

Instance of External Whistleblowing: Infosys, reached a $35m settlement with US authorities

for an alleged visa fraud, a former employee Jack Palmer made instant headlines in India. Jack Palmer,
the then IT manager with the Indian outsourcing giant, had filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the
company alleging that it was deliberately flouting the US visa rules to facilitate visits of its Indian
employees on short-term B1 visas back in February 2011.

2. TYPES OF WRONGDOINGS
In the process of whistleblowing there occur several types of wrongdoings. A sample survey (N=1,000)
shows ethical, financial malpractice, work safety, public safety and patient safety as the areas of major
concern.

Other concerns were about environment, discrimination/ harassment or consumer, competition and
regulation.

Ethical concerns could include: abuse of position, cronyism, breach of policy, breach of
confidentiality, or manipulation of scientific research.

Work safety usually relates to health and safety in the workplace, principally affecting employees.
This could include unsafe machinery or no appropriate safety equipment.

Public safety is where the safety of the public is at risk. This could include faulty wiring on a train
track or unsafe meat in a supermarket.

Ethical and financial concerns were the most common types of malpractice followed closely by work
safety. These concerns take place across all industries, while concerns such as patient safety or work
safety are more sectors specific to health and social care.
An ethical concern may be subjective and often occurs in grey areas where workers may be unsure
whether or not they should raise the matter. This may explain why more individuals seek support when
faced with an ethical concern.
With regards to those who witness financial malpractice, they may be likely to seek advice because of
the serious implications for the wrongdoer or organization if they raise a concern. The malpractice may
involve criminal activity (e.g. theft or bribery) or the individual may be at risk themselves if they do not
report the concern, as in the case of accountants or FSA authorized persons.
Additionally financial malpractice can take place across all organizations. While ethical or financial
concerns are the most statistically common, on a sector by sector basis the number of concerns about
patient safety concerns remains very high considering it is likely they occur only in care or health.

3. RAISING A CONCERN
We looked at the first four events in a whistleblower's journey, which include where the whistleblower
actually raises the concern or expresses an intention to raise the concern. In 868 cases a concern was
actually raised and in 132 cases an intention to raise a concern was expressed. There were only some
cases when the whistleblower raised the concern more than four times, however this was highly
exceptional.
From our total sample of 1,000 advice line cases, in 868 of these the concern had been raised at least
once, in 483 at least twice, in 141 at least three times, and in 22 cases the concern had been raised four
times. In 132 cases people expressed only an intention to raise a concern.

Most whistleblowers (44%) actually raise a concern only once, however another 39% raised a concern
twice. It is important to note that while there is a large decrease from those who raise a concern twice to
those who raise a concern three or four times, the whistleblower may continue on their journey and
raise a concern in one of the ways we have advised. It is unusual that they will call us back to let us
know what they decided to do or how the matter may have been resolved.
Whistleblowers' motivation decreases each time they are faced with raising a concern. This is most
obvious in the disparity between those who raise a concern twice and those who raise a concern three
times. This shows that employers usually have up to two opportunities to listen to individuals.
This drop in motivation could be explained by a number of factors, e.g. they may have suffered some
form of reprisal, fear losing their job, or have lost faith that anything will be done. Additionally
individuals usually want to raise a matter locally, where they know the managers that they are
contacting. Once these first two options have been exhausted, going elsewhere may feel alien or
challenging. If employers do not have clear, well promoted policies it is unlikely an individual will
know where to go after they have raised a matter locally and it has not been resolved.
Whistleblowers can raise a concern either within the organization (internal), outside of the organization
(external) or where relevant, with their trade union. We then looked at how this changed depending on
how many times the whistleblower tries to raise a concern. We coded the recipients as follows:

Internal - wrongdoer, line manager, higher manager, grievance, specialist route

External - regulator, independent bodies

Union - union representative

To avoid ambiguity, the following categories cover:

Grievance - where the individual raises a concern usually with personal issues, via the formal
grievance procedure

Specialist - audit, compliance, through a whistleblowing hotline, professional body

(advisory)&Independent bodies - police, MP, NGO, media

Other customer, colleagues etc.

4. GRIEVANCE MAY LEAD TO EXTERNAL

WHISTLEBLOWING
A grievance procedure places the onus on an individual to prove their complaint. A whistleblower is a
witness, passing on information to those with a responsibility to address the problem. As such the
grievance vehicle is unsuited to a whistleblowing concern as a witness shouldnt have to prove their
concern.
Employees are willing to give their employers a number of opportunities to look at the concern before
they make an external disclosure. If a concern is ignored or not addressed at an earlier stage only the
more tenacious individuals will pursue this, carrying a risk for organizations if they fail to address the
concern quickly. To mitigate the risk of missing an important warning, organizations need to ensure
strong lines of communication and good training in line and middle management. This indicates a
need for an integrated compliance culture throughout an organization.
The use of grievance procedures will drive a whistleblowing concern into a formalized process and
is likely to indicate an escalating workplace dispute. The grievance procedure may be used for a number
of reasons, e.g. failure to investigate, a poor investigation, or because the whistleblower is experiencing
victimization. The grievance process is only suitable for the latter, where a whistleblower is seeking
redress for poor treatment. As such the onus is on employers to ensure staff knows the difference
between grievances and whistleblowing that whistleblowers are listened to at an early stage, protected
from victimization, and to ensure that all staff know that they can raise a concern, before the matter
becomes a more complex workplace dispute.
Fear of reprisal or inertia on managements part or lack of feedback may lead an employee to blow the
whistle externally. However, overall these statistics show that there is a reluctance to raise the concern
externally. On the advice line whistleblowers often fear losing their job if they raise a concern externally.
It is particularly challenging for those who are working with patients, vulnerable adults or children, as
they may fear passing on confidential information in breach of their professional duties.
Below is a data showing attempts at whistleblowing with respect to internal, external and union with
specific sample sizes.

5. WHISTLEBLOWERS POSITION
The position of the whistleblower can vary according to degree of work. It can be basically categorized
into the following:
Unskilled (e.g. careers, support workers, bartenders)
Administrative/clerical positions (e.g. office administrators, secretaries, advisers)
Skilled (e.g. brokers, chefs, engineers)
Professionals (e.g. nurses, doctors, teachers, accountants)
Management (e.g. line managers, general managers)
Executive (e.g. board members, chair persons)
Unknown (e.g. scientist, researcher, specialists)

Our sample ranges from unskilled and skilled workers, followed by administrative/clerical positions,
professionals, managers and executives at the top of the organizational structure.
Similar numbers of unskilled workers (13%) and managers (15%) blow the whistle. This suggests that

whistleblowers can come from all career paths, from the bottom of an organization to the top. From this
we can see that typically our callers are skilled workers (27%) and professionals (26%).As 53% of our
calls come from skilled workers and professionals, it seems as though a workers level of
expertise affects their propensity to seek advice or access our support. This could be due to a variety of
factors, for example, their education, knowledge of whistleblowing, the sector in which they work
professional ethics, guidance from professional bodies or professional duties.

6. SAFETY AT WORKPLACE
According to study it has been seen that those who raised a work safety concern were likely to be
dismissed at first and second attempt than those who raised other types of concern. Safety at workplace
can raise concern on the following areas:

PATIENT SAFETY:
Whistleblowers, who raised a patient safety concern were more likely to suffer formal reprisal
throughout the journey and less likely to encounter informal reprisal than those raising other types of
wrongdoing. Also, those who were dismissed for raising a patient safety concern, tended to be dismissed
at their first attempt to raise the concern.

ABUSE IN CARE:
Those who raise a concern about abuse in care were comparatively more likely to see their resources
blocked or suffer formal reprisal along the journey. However, these whistleblowers were less likely to be
dismissed.

WORK SAFETY:

Those who raised a work safety concern were more likely to be dismissed at first
and second attempt than those who raised other types of concern. Formal reprisal
was also experienced more at first attempt, while informal reprisal or blocked
resources were experienced less.

FINANCIAL MALPRACTISE:
Those who raised a concern about financial malpractice were more likely to have their resources
blocked at the first instance with formal reprisal following later on. Notably, they experienced less
informal reprisal and were less likely to be dismissed the longer the journey went on.

ETHICAL:
8

Those who raised an ethical concern were initially met with more informal reprisal compared to other
types of concern. However, those who continued to raise the concern were more likely to be dismissed.
In summary, with concerns such as abuse in care and financial malpractice, areas which have both
received significant media attention, management tend to block resources or resort to formal reprisal and
are less likely to dismiss whistleblowers.

7. POSITIONAL HIERARCHY AND

WHISTLEBLOWING
In organizations where whistleblowers encounter reprisal, whistleblowers who are lower in the hierarchy
tend to be tolerated longer, while whistleblowers with a higher position tend to be dismissed much
earlier. This may be because they are deemed more of a threat due to an expectation that they will do
more to expose the wrongdoing.
RESPONSE FROM CO-WORKERS
We distinguished the following common responses from colleagues:
Informal - where the whistleblower is bullied, harassed or ostracized.
Formal - where the whistleblower has a formal accusation or a grievance entered against them.
Support - where the whistleblower experiences support from colleagues on a wider basis than
raising the concern with others.
As with the responses from management, we coded whether the response was expected, feared,
threatened or whether the response has actually happened. Responses were noted each time the
whistleblower raised a concern:
20% (200) of our sample mentioned specific responses from colleagues. We assume that the
remaining 80% received no subjectively significant response from colleagues.
Of these 200:
9% expected a response in the first instance, 14% in the second instance;
2% received a threat in the first instance, 2% in the second instance; and
89% received an actual response in the first instance

CASE STUDY BASED ON INDIA IN SIMILAR

CONTEXT

C K Mathivanan, the BSNL whistleblower whose pension was withheld after he exposed a
secret telephone exchange allegedly set up at former Union telecom minister Dayanidhi
Maran's Boat Club Road residence in Chennai for transmission of data and visuals of his
brother, Kalanithi Maran's television channel, has finally been rendered justice.
Overruling the recommendations of a group of senior BSNL officials, who sought to
penalize Mathivanan and 78 of his colleagues for carrying out agitations in September
2011 against the Maran brothers and former BSNL chief general manager M P Velusamy
(in whose name the 323-line ISDN clandestine exchange was allotted), BSNL CMD R K
Upadhyay had ordered the chief general manager A Balasubramanian to review the case.
In a recent order, Balasubramanian said Mathivanan will be given full pension benefits with
immediate effect. The official had retired as sub-divisional engineer in June 2013. TOI had
reported Mathivanan's sufferings two months ago.

8. WHISTLEBLOWING: WHEN COWORKER IS

WRONGDOER
The whistleblower is likely to suffer formal reprisal where the wrongdoer is a co-worker and they are
aware of the identity of whistleblower. This could be a grievance for bullying or harassment or
counter allegation of some description.
If there are reprisals from co-workers, these are most likely to be informal reprisals (58% across
recipients) and they are most likely to happen when raising a concern with the line manager (65%) or
specialist channels (100%). Formal reprisal by co-workers seem most likely when a concern is raised
with higher management (46%).There was also some support from co-workers (2%) when raising a
concern with higher management. As the whistleblowing path continues, formal reprisal from coworkers become more likely (at second step 54% compared to 42% informal), and is most likely to
come from co-workers when raising a concern with an independent body (56%), through a grievance
(100%), or to line management (53%). The more often an individual raises a concern the more
likely they are to suffer formal reprisal from co-workers. The whistleblower is likely to suffer formal
reprisal where the wrongdoer is a co-worker and they are aware of the identity of the whistleblower.
This could be a grievance for bullying or harassment or a counter allegation of some description.

10

Responses from co-workers per recipient at first attempt (in %)

9. WHISTLBLOWING AND BULLYING

The terms bullying and harassment and victimization are often used interchangeably. Bullying currently
has no legal definition, but is generally seen as offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behavior,
an abuse or misuse of power through means intended to undermine or injure the recipient in some way.
Bullying is unwelcome and unwarranted. In a workplace, it often takes place when a more senior person
is bullying someone in a more junior position. It is mainly seen as intimidating or offensive. A legal
claim for bullying would generally come under legislation for harassment.
The act of bullying is defined by three main factors:
There must be intent by the bully to cause harm to the victim.
The behavior is repeated over time. This is different than getting angry. The victim must be a
target.
There exists an imbalance of power between the bully and the bullied. Often bullies are stronger
than their victims or they perhaps hold a higher status among their peers.

11

10. BULLYING: WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS

Some of the most common cases include an Employee saying: "I was doing fine at work until
we got this new manager. Everything I did seemed to be wrong and he kept
criticizing me in front of everyone. In the end it got me down so much that I
quit." Unfortunately bullying doesn't only happen at school. It can also happen in the workplace. If you

are being bullied you don't have to put up with it.

The top reasons for being bullied are:
Being in the wrong place at the wrong time,
Being good at your job,
Being popular with people,
Unwittingly drawing attention to another person's incompetence simply by being competent
Blowing the whistle on malpractice, fraud, illegality, breaches of rules, regulations and
procedures, or raising health and safety issues,
Having a high level of integrity and emotional maturity.
WORKPLACE BULLYING
12

There is no set list of bullying behaviour, but it includes constant unfair criticism, as well as things like
shouting at staff, making someone the butt of jokes, making offensive personal comments and setting
someone up to fail by overloading them with work. If you genuinely feel like you are being picked on
unfairly by your boss or another colleague, you are probably being bullied.

11. WHAT SHOULD ONE DO

Dealing with bullying takes courage, especially because the bully is often someone in a position of
authority. But remember that you have the right not to be bullied at work. If your employer is treating
you in a way you are unhappy with, or not giving you what you are entitled to, don't suffer in silence.
You can take action to deal with the problem.
Every work situation is different, so there isn't just one way of dealing with a problem. What you should
do will depend on what kind of relationship you have with your employer and the type of problem you
have.

Top Tips for dealing with work problems:

If it is an ongoing problem like bullying or discrimination, keep a diary. It's important to have a
record of what's happening to you.

If you decide to talk to your employer directly, go through what you are going to say with a
friend first - try to stay calm and polite so you don't lose control of the situation. Immediately
after you have talked to them, make a note of what was said by both of you.
13

Don't delay in taking steps to deal with a problem, remember there's usually a 3 month deadline
for making a claim at an employment tribunal.

If you decide to make a formal complaint, make sure you are familiar with your employer's
complaint procedures.

If you are having a meeting with your managers about a complaint you have made or because
they have complained about your work or behavior, you can take a fellow worker or a trade
union representative with you to the meeting. This is a good idea, as it will give you moral
support as well as a witness to what is said.

A popular business magazines print.

12. BULLYING IN INDIA: A CASE STUDY

27th January, 2014: Greenpeace India took legal recourse to respond to the defamation suit of Rs.500
crore filed by Essar. The company has filed the legal suit in the Bombay High Court against Greenpeace
India and Mahan Sangharsh Samiti (MSS) - an organization set up to defend the rights of those, who
derive their livelihood from the Mahan forests. This comes after 14 Greenpeace forest activists scaled
the company's headquarters in Mahalakshmi last week and unfurled a giant banner. The MSS and
youngsters from Mumbai had staged a dharna outside the entrance of the company's building protesting
the proposed destruction of Mahan forests a biodiversity rich forest in Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh by
the company.
"These are bullying tactics, plain and simple. Essar is trying to sue us for an amount that is multiple
times more than our annual income, which comes from our committed individual supporters. Our protest
at Essar's headquarters last week was simply to draw people's attention towards Essar's plans for
rampant destruction of the environment, forest, human and wildlife by coal mining, in the biodiversity
rich forest of Mahan. Along with the demand that Essar cancels its proposed coal mine in Mahan,
Greenpeace India has also sought the sacking of MoEF, Veerappa Moily for his speedy clearances at the
cost of the environment from the Prime Minister of the country.

14

Essar has demanded a bizarre sum of Rs. 500 crore from an NGO that is almost entirely funded
by donations from individual supporters and the members of MSS, who earn their livelihood from
the Mahan forests, which Essar plans to clear to make way for coal mines. The company has also
pressed for gag order on Greenpeace on social and traditional news media and demanded the NGO to
stay away from its premises. It is morally repugnant from a billionaire corporation to demand such
ridiculous amounts of money from peaceful protestors who were only demanding their rights over their
forests. Apart from this defamation suit, the Mumbai police had arrested 67 Greenpeace activists
including members of the MSS and youngsters from Mumbai, who had participated in the protest
outside Essar's building. All the activists have been granted bail by a sub-divisional-magistrate's court in
Mumbai. Greenpeace will continue to relentlessly expose violations by private corporations and the
government wherever they attempt to work against the environment and the people.

The Organizations involved in the case.

13. WHISTLEBLOWING AND HARRASSMENT

Harassment generally means that someone is suffering because of someone elses unwelcome conduct
on grounds such as age, race, gender, nationality or religion, which humiliates or demeans the
victim. Bullying and harassment is not only face to face, it can also take place via emails, and other
forms of communication.
Commonly claims for bullying, harassment or victimization will be linked to discriminatory grounds such as sex or race. In many cases workers will claim they are being victimized because they have
sought to assert their rights under discrimination legislation (making what is known as a "protected act"
and being subject to a detriment as a result), but the right not to be victimized is wider than that and
covers workers who make claims for whistleblowing, raise health and safety issues or who take time off
work to accompany a fellow worker in a disciplinary or grievance procedure and are subject to a
detriment, amongst other categories.
LAW IN INDIA

15

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act,
2013 is a legislative act in India that seeks to protect women from sexual harassment at their place of
work. It was passed by the Lok Sabha (the lower house of the Indian Parliament) on 3 September 2012.
It was passed by the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of the Indian Parliament) on 26 February 2013.[1] The
Bill got the assent of the President on 23 April 2013.[2] The Act came into force from 9 December 2013.
[3]

14. HARASSMENT : INDIAN LAW AND GUIDELINE

According to the Press Information Bureau of the India. The Act will ensure that women are protected
against sexual harassment at all the work places, be it in public or private. This will contribute to
realization of their right to gender equality, life and liberty and equality in working conditions
everywhere. The sense of security at the workplace will improve women's participation in work,
resulting in their economic empowerment and inclusive growth.
The Act uses a definition of sexual harassment which was laid down by the Supreme Court of India in
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997). Article 19 (1) g of the Indian Constitution affirms the right of all
citizens to be employed in any profession of their choosing or to practice their own trade or business.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan established that actions resulting in a violation of one's rights to Gender
Equality and Life and Liberty is in fact a violation of the victims fundamental right under Article 19
(1) g. The case ruling establishes that sexual harassment violates a woman's rights in the workplace and
is thus not just a matter of personal injury.

Major Features
16

The Act defines sexual harassment at the work place and creates a mechanism for redressal of
complaints. It also provides safeguards against false or malicious charges.
The definition of aggrieved woman, who will get protection under the Act is extremely wide to
cover all women, irrespective of her age or employment status, whether in the organized or
unorganized sectors, public or private and covers clients, customers and domestic workers as
well.

While the workplace in the Vishaka Guidelines is confined to the traditional office set-up
where there is a clear employer-employee relationship, the Act goes much further to include
organizations, department, office, branch unit etc. in the public and private sector, organized and
unorganized, hospitals, nursing homes, educational institutions, sports institutes, stadiums, sports
complex and any place visited by the employee during the course of employment including the
transportation.

The Committee is required to complete the inquiry within a time period of 90 days. On
completion of the inquiry, the report will be sent to the employer or the District Officer, as the
case may be, they are mandated to take action on the report within 60 days.

Every employer is required to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee at each office or

branch with 10 or more employees. The District Officer is required to constitute a Local
Complaints Committee at each district, and if required at the block level.

The Complaints Committees have the powers of civil courts for gathering evidence.

The Complaints Committees are required to provide for conciliation before initiating an inquiry,
if requested by the complainant.

Penalties have been prescribed for employers. Non-compliance with the provisions of the Act
shall be punishable with a fine of up to 50,000. Repeated violations may lead to higher penalties
and cancellation of license or registration to conduct business.

15. HARASSMENT IN INDIA : CASE STUDIES

The below cases involve harassment at workplaces and the instances of
whistleblowing involved in all of them mentioned.
1.UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR ACCUSED IN SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Mohammad Shabbir, professor has been found guilty of sexual harassment of a law student. The
additional district judge Aligarh on Friday cancelled the interim bail of AMU (Aligarh Muslim
University) professor Mohammad Shabbir after he failed to appear in the court. Investigating officer
Haider Raza Zaidi said since Shabbir failed to appear before the judge, his interim bail was cancelled. A
non-bailable warrant will be issued against him soon, he said, adding: "A notice is also being sent to the
surety who failed to produce him before the court."
17

Shabbir had surrendered before ACJM court on January 7 after being on the run for many weeks. He
was, however, granted interim bail by the ADJ after ACJM rejected his bail plea. He had to appear in the
court on January 13 but the hearing was postponed to January 17.AMU had suspended Shabbir, who
was law department chairman, on December 5 after a law student, Saira (name changed), blew the
whistle by lodging an FIR accusing him of sexual harassment. The charges were prima facie found
true by the university's women grievance committee.
Eight years ago, Prof Shabbir was suspended on charges of sexually harassing a visiting US student. But
he was later exonerated in an internal investigation. Shabbir had filed a surrender application in chief
judicial magistrate court. His plea was dismissed after he failed to surrender within a stipulated time. He
then filed a petition in the Allahabad high court on December 11 seeking stay on his arrest and quashing
of the FIR. The court had refused to interfere and left it on the investigating officer to take action.

2. THE FALL OF A HIGH PRIEST (A BRIEF LOOK)

This is a story of blackmail, sex, stalking, threats, oppression, hurt feelings and revenge. Interestingly,
all this happened in and around the US offices of Infosys, one of India's most well-known and respected
software companies, between October 1999 and December 2000.
As a result, Infosys became entangled in a scandal, that dented its reputation as a company that had the
best corporate governance structure in the country. The events that took place during October 1999 and
December 2000 became public knowledge in India only when Phaneesh Murthy (Phaneesh), the head of
the sales and marketing, and communication and product services division of Infosys (and a director on
the board), resigned from his post in June 2002. Phaneesh said that he had resigned in order to focus on
fighting a lawsuit filed against him in the US. The lawsuit, filed by his former secretary, Reka
Maximovitch (Reka), blew the whistle alleging that Phaneesh had sexually harassed her and unlawfully
terminated her employment. The company's share price declined by 6.6% soon after Phaneesh left.
18

The case attracted a lot of media coverage since a sexual harassment lawsuit implicating such a senior
official had never been heard of in the Indian corporate world. It was also being seen as an event that
could make Indian companies stop ignoring the sensitive issue of sexual harassment at the workplace.
While sexual harassment of female employees was prevalent in the country, it was either not reported or
ignored. Either the victims kept quite due to fear of social ridicule and fear of losing their jobs, or the
matter was somehow hushed up by the management. The stance adopted by Infosys in this case seemed
to go against its image of a company considered to be a model of good corporate governance. Analysts
claimed that the company had kept the issue under wraps for a long time. Media reports blamed Infosys
for neglecting to formulate/implement a structured policy regarding sexual harassment and for
compromising on moral values for an 'economically-valuable' person like Phaneesh. Analysts wondered
how a company that Forbes had once described as "a model of transparency, not just for the rest of
corporate India but for companies everywhere," do such things! The saga of Phaneesh, Reka and Infosys
and the issue of sexual harassment at the workplace (in India as well as abroad) were debated heatedly
in corporate and media circles, as many more shocking events unfolded over the next one year.
The sexual harassment of employees manifests itself in different ways, depending on the social norms
prevalent in various parts of the world. Broadly speaking, sexual harassment at the workplace can be
divided into two categories: 'quid pro quo' and 'hostile working environment.'
Quid pro quo involves making the conditions of employment contingent on the employee
(prospective/existing) granting the employer sexual favors. The employer makes it very clear that hiring,
promotions, perks, facilities etc. would be possible only if the employee consents to the former's sexual
advances. This is a very 'easy to identify' and comparatively 'easy to prove' form of sexual harassment.
The 'hostile working environment' form of harassment, which is the basis of most of the court cases
filed, is more difficult to identify and prove. As per a 1993 US Supreme Court ruling, this has been
defined as, "When the workplace is permeated with 'discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that
is 'sufficiently' severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an
abusive working environment."
Thus, any employee who indulges in speech or conduct of sexually discriminatory nature, without
encouragement from/being welcomed by the employee so as to create an abusive working environment
and negatively affecting the employee's performance would fall under the purview of this form of
harassment. Though the law clearly defines sexual harassment, the diverse socio-cultural environment
of different countries complicates the matter. Reportedly, the rather 'free' behavior of Japanese bosses
towards their female subordinates would come as a shock to people from the US or many other parts of
the world. Even within a country, organization or office, the exact nature of the incident depends on the
attitude, upbringing and behavioral patterns of the people involved.

19

As far as the logo goes saying Infosys , Powered by intellect,driven by values,has this company be really
driven by values? Lyes the question. What the use of education if it doesnot bring values and pves the
way to become a good human, As far as the educational details of Phaneesh Murthy goes he was born in
a middle class Kannada family in Bangalore, Karnataka. He did his MBA from the Indian Institute of
Management, Ahmedabad and received his B.Tech Degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Indian
Institute of Technology, Madras. He has being again found fondling with employees. Subsequently, he
became the Chief Executive Officer of iGATE Corporation in 2003, after the company acquired his
start-up Quintant. Murthy later became President in 2006 and was re-elected in 2010. The board of
iGATE sacked its President and CEO Murthy in May 2013, following an investigation into a relationship
that he had with a subordinate employee and a claim of sexual harassment.

3. SENIOR EDITOR OF MAGAZINE (TEHELKA) FOUND HARASSING

There has been plenty of anguished debate in India lately about rapes by strangers. Now, the country is
riveted by a case that has revealed the sordid reality of workplace harassment, not by slum dwellers, but
by a suave darling of the New Delhi elite.
Tarun Tejpal, editor of the investigative journalism magazine Tehelka, has been accused of attempting to
rape a young female colleague. Tehelka specialises in sting operations, exposing corrupt politicians and
writing against sexual violence. While the magazine has lost some of its sheen in recent years, a
20

generation of journalists thought of Tejpal as a crusader for the underdog. No more. In a graphic email
leaked to the media, the victim accused Tejpal of assaulting her in a hotel lift during a festival in Goa.
The whole case might have been swept under the carpet if Tejpal had not written a series of emails, to
try to justify his behaviour. Initially, he admitted a "bad lapse of judgment" and "recused" himself from
the editorship of Tehelka for six months. Meanwhile, managing editor Shoma Chaudhury downplayed
the alleged rape in an email to staff, calling it an "untoward incident" to be dealt with internally. Then a
further email of "unconditional apology" from Tejpal to the victim emerged, in which he spoke of
attempting a "sexual liaison" despite her "clear reluctance". Faced with a barrage of criticism,
Chaudhury also quit, along with six other Tehelka staffers. In the latest development, Tejpal was this
week summoned to Goa for questioning by police and is on bail until Saturday morning.
There has been much introspection about how a man like Tejpal could have assaulted a young woman.
There has been even more angst about how a respected female journalist, and feminist, could argue that
sexual assault was simply an internal matter.
This kind of behaviour happens not just at Tehelka; most Indian workplaces are completely ill-equipped
to deal with working women. Often a culture of omerta prevails, and powerful men escape punishment.
Recently, a Supreme Court judge has been accused of sexual assault by a young female intern, who
allegedly remains too intimidated to file a case. And IT honcho Phaneesh Murthy has been involved in
three sexual harassment claims, yet continues to find employers. On the other hand, victims often find it
difficult to be hired once they speak up, and are viewed as troublemakers.Chaudhury admitted that
Tehelka did not have a committee to deal with sexual harassment, but this is hardly unusual. No one
does. Working women aren't going anywhere. India had better deal with it.

4. STUDENT BLOWS WHISTLE AGAINST I&B MINISTRY

Sabina Martins of women's organization Bailancho Saadh blew the whistle against I&B Ministry. She
has stated in a press note that the JNU student who was harassed by an information and broadcasting
(I&B) ministry officer while interning at the International Film Festival of India (IFFI) had complained
to the group and was advised to file a complaint with the sexual harassment committee.
"The complaint letter was instead routed to the IFFI director Shankar Mohan and the I&B ministry on
21

November 17, due to lack of information about the committee's whereabouts at the venue," states the
note.
It alleges that the committee was hurriedly constituted and the intern was not informed who the NGO
representative on it was. "The girl was told that the matter would be looked into, but no written apology
was taken from the accused. As the girl was traumatized, she tendered her resignation and left for
Delhi," the press note states.
Drawing parallels with the Tarun Tejpal case, the group pointed out that while the government has
initiated action in the above case, the IFFI officer continues to hold the post without giving even a
written apology. Demanding that punitive action be taken in both cases, the group said this would deter
the message that in Goa one can hold events and abuse women, especially if one has power. It pointed
out that it had found some officers and delegates drunk and creating a nuisance for women at IFFI.

16. WHISTLEBLOWINGS IMPACT: BULLYING AND

HARASSMENT
Employers have a duty of care to provide a safe working environment for their employees. The
definition of safety extends to emotional and psychological safety.

22

On 28 June 2013, Federal Parliament passed legislation granting the Fair Work Commission (FWC) the
power to deal with workplace bullying complaints, with the Fair Work Amendment Act No 73 2013
(Cth). The new anti-bullying laws will come into effect from 1 January 2014.
In essence a worker will be able to lodge a claim of repeated bullying direct with the FWC without
notifying his/her employer first. The Commission will be able to make orders which may include the
reporting of the matter to the relevant state or territory workplace health and safety regulator, but it
cannot order financial compensation to a worker nor order reinstatement. Failure of an employer to
comply with a Commission order could result in a financial penalty of up to $33000.
Companies that use whistleblowing services find they learn of bullying and harassment behaviors earlier
and can act to stamp them out faster before the behaviors become out of control. Naturally this is of
great benefit to the victims but also provides business owners with comfort as it limits their exposure to
legal and reputational risks including potentially hefty OHS fines and now even significant prison
sentences.

17. WHISTLEBLOWING AND FRAUD

Fraud is an act or course of deception, an intentional concealment, omission, or
perversion of truth, to
Gain unlawful or unfair advantage,

23

 Induce another to part with some valuable item or surrender a legal

right, or
Inflict injury in some manner.
Willful fraud is a criminal offense which calls for severe penalties, and its
prosecution and punishment (like that of a murder) is not bound by the statute of
limitations. However incompetence or negligence in managing a business or even
a reckless waste of firm's assets (by speculating on the stock market, for example)
does not normally constitute a fraud. In such cases, the aggrieved party (creditors
or stockholders/shareholders) must prove that at some point they were
intentionally deceived on a material fact.

WHISTLEBLOWING REDUCES FRAUD AND THEFT

Whistleblowing has helped reduce up to 50% of corporate fraud and theft in European, Asian countries.
Australia is lagging behind in implementing independent, anonymous whistleblowing services, therefore
we have not seen the same reduction in these risks.
An Australian/New Zealand 2012 fraud survey found the average fraud / theft per organisation in
Australia was $3.08 million with an 82% increase in individual frauds exceeding $1 million. Employees
behaving badly have caused severe monetary losses and significant disruption to business.

18. TYPES OF FRAUD

Fraud is when trickery is used to gain a dishonest advantage, which is often financial, over another
person. Some basic types of fraud are as follows:
24

INDIVIDUAL FRAUD: Individual fraud could be any fraud that targets a person directly.
Individual frauds can differ from frauds affecting businesses and other organisations. Individual frauds
can include:

Abuse of position of trust

Advance fee frauds

Bogus tradesmen fraud

Goods sold as investment

Holiday club fraud

CORPORATE FRAUD: Corporate fraud can be any fraud committed against a business. Fraud
impacting businesses can be both general frauds that target any business, to sector specific frauds.
Corporate frauds can include:

Account takeover
Application fraud

Bankruptcy-related fraud

Betting scams

Business directory fraud

ONLINE FRAUD: Some fraudsters rely on the internet to commit their crimes. Learn about some
different types of internet frauds that and how to protect yourself and get safe online. Online frauds can
include:

Account takeover
Advance fee frauds

Bank card and cheque fraud

Business directory fraud

Business opportunity fraud

ADVANCE FEE FRAUD: Advance fee fraud is when fraudsters target victims to make
advance or upfront payments for goods, services and/or financial gains that do not materialize. Types of
advance fee fraud include:

Career opportunity scams

Clairvoyant or psychic scams

Cheque overpayment fraud

25

Dating or romance scams

Fraud recovery fraud

19. FRAUD IN INDIA: CASE STUDIES

1. MUMBAI RANKS FIRST IN FRAUD CITIES LIST
Mumbai tops the list of cities with the highest number of frauds reported by banks, with the money
involved totaling Rs400 crore per year for the past five years. While for the financial year 2010-11,
banks in Mumbai reported 787 fraud cases involving Rs1,049 crore, the tally for the national capital was
335 cases, with the net amount lost being Rs269 crore, according to the documents obtained under the
Right to Information (RTI) Act from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
Interestingly, the total number of banking frauds reported in Mumbai every year is more than those of
Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata and Bangalore taken together. While a five year average figure for Mumbai is
about 800 cases, the number for other cities is approximately 200.
As per the report, of the 4,099 cases registered in Mumbai since 2006, only 564cases (those where the
amount involved is above Rs1 lakh) have been closed. The city lost Rs1, 882 crore over these five years,
of which only Rs63 crore has been recovered, reveals the RTI response. Experts blame the low recovery
rate on the lack of know-how in detecting and preventing frauds in the era of internet and mobile
banking. Firstly, the banks do not even seem to have the required classification of
Internet-related frauds. According to the RBI, there is no distinct category of Phishing Complaints,
and as such no separate data/information is classified/compiled in this regard. But phishing is a
common method of online identity theft where information such as usernames, password and other bank
details are acquired.
According to the internet banking guidelines issued by the RBI in 2001, banks need to assess the risks
arising out of phishing, consider them as operational risk and cover it with insurance. Either they are
ignoring the RBI mandate or are hiding the information, said Na Vijayashankar, cyber law expert.
There are several cases where banks have refused to take any responsibility for banking fraud. Gujarat
Petrosynthese Ltd, a Mumbai-based company lost Rs.39, 00,550/ from its account with Axis Bank,
Bangalore, on 20th June 2011 to hackers. The police are investigating. But the banking sector has not
been sympathetic, said Urmi N Prasad, executive director with Gujarat Petrosynthese Ltd. Similarly,
Pramod B Bauskar from Mumbai lost Rs 1, 97,000 from ICICI bank to an internet fraud in mid-2011.
Bank officials rejected my plea outright, saying it was my fault and the bank will not do anything about
it, said Bauskar.

26

2. SAHARA GROUP IN TROUBLE

SEBI blows the whistle against Sahara. In its desperate bid to contest SEBI (Stock exchange board of
India)s contentions in the Supreme Court, Sahara India Parivar has inadvertently said something which
other business houses would not have the guts to say. In an advertisement published in newspapers today
Sahara has said that throughout the country development of Residential, Commercial, IT
establishments etc. are allowed and Townships are developed in No Development Zones. In other
words, the real estate sector in India is built on illegalities. Now, this is almost an open secret. And the
Aam Admi not just the Party, most of the true blue Aam admis too knows this well enough. But,
when the revelation comes from a business conglomerate it is heartening to hear. It is a candid
confession, to say the least. Saharas advertisement comes in response to Sebis recent submission in the
Supreme Court that the documents submitted by the group as collateral for the amount to be refunded to
investors have overvalued the properties. In August 2012, the group was ordered to refund about Rs
20,000 crore (including interest) two of its firms had raised from investors through illegal optionally
fully convertible debentures. The Supreme Court later gave further extensions, but the group is yet to
conform to the order. The capital market regulator Sebi is overseeing the refund. The group, however,
claims that it has done most of the refunds and only about Rs 5000 crore is left. The court last month
ordered the group to submit documents of properties worth Rs 20,000 crore with Sebi as collateral for
the refund amount. In keeping with this order, Sahara gave Sebi documents of two plots of land. One is a
106-acre land in Versova, a western suburb in Mumbai, which it claimed is worth around Rs 19,000
crore. The second one is a 200-acre land in Vasai, again a distant Mumbai suburb, which it estimates to
be worth about Rs 1,000 crore. It was this valuation that Sebi challenged in the court. Sebi counsel
Arvind Datar said Sahara has valued the Versova property by using discounted valuation method (BS
report). Under this, if a township is built on this plot by 2021, it would be worth Rs 19,000 crore. This
value has been discounted to the present value. Datar also said that the Versova land parcel is surrounded
two creeks and so, it is in Green Zone. In other words, it is a no development zone, where no
commercial activity is possible (Mint report). Contesting these arguments by Sebi, Sahara has alleged
that the capital market regulator has placed irrelevant facts before the court. SEBI has tried to convince
that everyone that in a No Development Zone, nothing at all can be developed, it says. But it is not so,
it says. Then comes the damning revelation about the Indian real estate sector that most of the real estate
developments in India happen in such zones. Sahara has levelled other allegations too, like Sebi did the
same with a property document that Sahara had submitted to it in March 2012; and that Sebi has not yet
refunded to investors the Rs 5,120 crore Sahara had given it last year. Reuters Sahara has levelled other
allegations too, like Sebi did the same with a property document that Sahara had submitted to it in
March 2012; and that Sebi has not yet refunded to investors the Rs 5,120 crore Sahara had given it last
year. Reuters Sahara has levelled other allegations too, like Sebi did the same with a property document
that Sahara had submitted to it in March 2012; and that Sebi has not yet refunded to investors the Rs
5,120 crore Sahara had given it last year.
27

3. DIRTY MEDICINE
Drug major Ranbaxy Laboratories used "fraudulent" data to get the US Food and Drug Administration's
(USFDA) approval to sell its generic drugs, according to whistleblower Dinesh Thakur, who has also
accused the drug-maker of faking test results. An ex-employee of the company, Thakur, who was tasked
with investigations of alleged malpractices in the Ranbaxy, further said: "We started getting the files,
and, lo and behold, we find that none of that exists in the first place... It means that we've gotten
approvals from the FDA to sell drugs that were based on no data, or data that was fraudulent."
In an interview to 'CBS News', Thakur said: "The data is important because the FDA or other agencies
globally look at that information to give you marketing authorization to sell the drug."
Pointing out how test results were allegedly manipulated, he said: "When you find a blood sample
rework for one patient copied 23 times because there are 24 patients needed to prove bioequivalence,
that's not an error. Comments from Ranbaxy Laboratories could not be obtained as spokespersons
could not be reached.
Elaborating how the company's drug failed to provide relief, Thakur said: "The expectations is the drug
is supposed to work as intended... What we saw in this particular case is that trust was broken."
Recounting an incident where his son was prescribed a Ranbaxy antibiotic for a fever, Thakur said: "He
(son) kept getting worse, so we got another company's formulation and the fever went away."
In May this year, Ranbaxy had pleaded guilty to 'felony charges' for violating manufacturing norms and
agreed to pay $500 million penalty to US authorities. The settlement was the largest-ever with a generic
drug-maker over drug safety, according to the US government. It included $150 million in payments for
a criminal fine and forfeiture and $350 million in payments for civil claims. Whistleblower Thakur was
awarded $48.6 million by a US court for the role he played in exposing malpractices in the company.
The USFDA had banned Ranbaxy in 2008 from shipping 30 generic drugs to the US from its two units
in India - Paonta Sahib in Himachal Pradesh and Dewas in Madhya Pradesh. In an earlier interview to
PTI in July, Ranbaxy Laboratories CEO and Managing Director Arun Sawhney had said the company
has rectified past "shortcomings" and the firm has invested more than 300 million dollars in recent years
in infrastructure of manufacturing, quality, resourcing and training to strengthen its system to prevent
such incident happening again.

28

20. WIKILEAKS: WE LEAK SECRETS

Who doesnt know the name of WIKILEAKS, known to be the premier whistleblowing organization the
world. WikiLeaks is an international, online, non-profit, journalistic organisation which publishes secret
information, news leaks, and classified media from anonymous sources. Its website, initiated in 2006 in
Iceland by the organization Sunshine Press, claimed a database of more than 1.2 million documents
within a year of its launch. Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its
founder, editor-in-chief, and director. Kristinn Hrafnsson, Joseph Farrell, and Sarah Harrison are the
only other publicly known and acknowledged associates of Julian Assange
The group has released a number of significant documents which have become front-page news items.
Early releases included documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the Afghanistan war
and corruption in Kenya. In April 2010, WikiLeaks published gunsight footage from the 12 July 2007
Baghdad airstrike in which Iraqi journalists were among those killed by an AH-64 Apache helicopter,
known as the Collateral Murder video. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary,
a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan not previously available to
the public. In October 2010, the group released a set of almost 400,000 documents called the "Iraq War
Logs" in coordination with major commercial media organisations. This allowed the mapping of
109,032 deaths in "significant" attacks by insurgents in Iraq that had been reported to Multi-National
Force Iraq, including about 15,000 that had not been previously published. In April 2011, WikiLeaks
began publishing 779 secret files relating to prisoners detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.
In November 2010, WikiLeaks collaborated with major global media organisations to release U.S. State
department diplomatic "cables" in redacted format. On 1 September 2011, it became public that an
encrypted version of WikiLeaks' huge archive of unredacted U.S. State Department cables had been
available via BitTorrent for months and that the decryption key (similar to a password) was available to
those who knew where to find it. WikiLeaks blamed the breach on its former publication partner, the UK
newspaper The Guardian, and that newspaper's journalist David Leigh, who revealed the key in a book
published in February 2011; The Guardian argued that WikiLeaks was to blame since they gave the
impression that the decryption key was temporary (something not possible for a file decryption key).
The German periodical Der Spiegel reported a more complex story involving errors on both sides. The
incident resulted in widely expressed fears that the information released could endanger innocent lives.

29

WikiLeaks logo an hourglass with globe leaking inside.

FOUNDING AND PURPOSE

Julian Assange was one of the early members of the WikiLeaks staff and is credited as
the website's founder.
The wikileaks.org domain name was registered on 4 October 2006. The website was begun, and
published its first document, in December 2006. WikiLeaks has been predominantly represented in
public since January 2007 by Julian Assange, who is now generally recognised as the "founder of
WikiLeaks. According to the magazine Wired, a volunteer said that Assange described himself in a
private conversation as "the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson,
original coder, organizer, financier, and all the rest".
WikiLeaks relies to some degree on volunteers and previously described its founders as a mixture of
Asian dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United
States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa, but has progressively adopted a more traditional
publication model and no longer accepts either user comments or edits. As of June 2009, the website had
more than 1,200 registered volunteers and listed an advisory board comprising Assange, his deputy Jash
Vora and seven other people, some of whom denied any association with the organisation.
Despite using the name "WikiLeaks", the website has not used the "wiki" publication method since May
2010.Also, despite some popular confusion due to both having "wiki" in their names, WikiLeaks and
Wikipedia are not affiliated with each other ("wiki" is not a brand name);Wikia, a for-profit corporation
affiliated loosely with the Wikimedia Foundation, did purchase several WikiLeaks-related domain
names (including wikileaks.com and wikileaks.net) as a "protective brand measure" in 2007.

Purpose
According to the WikiLeaks website, its goal is "to bring important news and information to the public
One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so
readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth."

30

Another of the organisation's goals is to ensure that journalists and whistleblowers are not jailed for
emailing sensitive or classified documents. The online "drop box" is described by the WikiLeaks website
as "an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to [WikiLeaks]
journalists".
In an interview as part of the American television programme The Colbert Report, Assange discussed
the limit to the freedom of speech, saying, "[it is] not an ultimate freedom, however free speech is what
regulates government and regulates law. That is why in the US Constitution the Bill of Rights says that
Congress is to make no such law abridging the freedom of the press. It is to take the rights of the press
outside the rights of the law because those rights are superior to the law because in fact they create the
law. Every constitution, every bit of legislation is derived from the flow of information. Similarly every
government is elected as a result of people understanding things".

CONCLUSION
While working on this project previously I concluded that the bill was pending in the Rajya Sabha but it
got passed pretty recently so I had to make some adjustments to my work. Whistle Blowers Protection
Bill was approved by the Cabinet of India as part of a drive to eliminate corruption in the country's
bureaucracy and passed by the Lok Sabha on 27 December 2011. The Bill was passed by Rajya Sabha
on 21 February 2014 and is waiting for President's assent.

NEED OF LEGISLATION
There have been multiple instances of threatening, harassment and even murder of various
whistleblowers.

An engineer, Satyendra Dubey, was murdered in November 2003; Dubey had blown the whistle
in a corruption case in the National Highways Authority of Indias Golden Quadrilateral project.
Two years later, an Indian Oil Corporation officer, Shanmughan Manjunath, was murdered for
sealing a petrol pump that was selling adulterated fuel.
A Karnataka official SP Mahantesh, said to be a whistle-blower in controversial land allotments
by societies was murdered in May 2012. Mahantesh was working as Deputy Director of the audit
wing in the states Cooperative department and had reported irregularities in different societies
involving some officials and political figures.
A senior police officer alleged that Mayawati's government was corrupt and had embezzled large
amounts of money. Shortly thereafter, he was sent to a psychiatric hospital.

Activists are seeking a quick passage of the Whistleblowers Protection Bill in Parliament. The demands
are that a law should be framed to protect whistleblowers, facilitate the disclosure of information and
uncover corruption in government organisations.

LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

31

Stage
Introduction
Standing Committee referral
Standing Committee report
Lok Sabha
Rajya Sabha

Date
August 26, 2010
September 16, 2010
June 9, 2011
Passed on 27th December 2011
Passed on 21st February 2014

In June 2011, a parliamentary panel recommended that ministers, the higher judiciary, security
organisations, defence and intelligence forces and regulatory authorities be brought under the
whistleblowers' protection bill to check corruption and the wilful misuse of power.

ANALYSIS OF LEGISLATION
According to Indian law reports, the bill has faced considerable criticism because
Its jurisdiction is restricted to the government sector and encompasses only those who are
working for the Government of India or its agencies;
It does not cover the state-government employees. However, the draft bill aimed at protecting
whistleblowers is seen as a welcome move.
The lack of public debate and consultation on the bill seems to indicate the danger of it becoming
another "paper tiger". Typically, ministries proposing draft legislation involve a process of public
consultation to give the public an opportunity to carefully critique its provisions. In this case, such an
opportunity has been denied to the public, which has not gone unnoticed.
The proposed law has neither provisions to encourage whistleblowing (financial incentives), nor deals
with corporate whistleblowers; it does not extend its jurisdiction to the private sector (a strange
omission, after the fraud at Satyam). The Directorate of Income Tax Intelligence and Criminal
Investigation is one of the only agencies empowered for whistle blower protection.
The bill aims to balance the need to protect honest officials from harassment with protecting persons
making a public-interest disclosure. It outlines sanctions for false complaints. However, it does not
provide a penalty for attacking a complainant.

32

CVC: BLOW YOUR WHISTLE

The Central Vigilance Commission plans to create more awareness about corruption in India. To
encourage the fight against corruption, CVC has provided on their website, a "Lodge Complaints
Online portal.
Caution: However, as of September 2013, this portal uses an unauthorized SSL Certificate
which possibly compromises security (easily verified by visiting the portal link using a properly
configured web browser).
The earlier publicized portal is no longer functional.

ROLE OF SUPREME COURT

Situations are many where certain persons do not want to disclose the identity as well as the
information/complaint passed on by them to the ACB. If the names of the persons, as well as the copy of
the complaint sent by them are disclosed, that may cause embarrassment to them and sometimes threat
to their lives.
Referring back to, Satyendra Dubey a whistleblower and National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
engineer was murdered after he exposed corruption in the construction of highways. As a result, the
Supreme Court, in April 2004, pressed the government into issuing an office order, the Public Interest
Disclosures and Protection of Informers Resolution, 2004 designating CVC as the nodal agency.
In March 2011, the Supreme Court refused to frame guidelines for protection of whistle blowers
in the country, saying that it cannot make law. However, the court allowed the petitioners to
approach the high court for protection of whistleblowers in a specific case.

33

 In August 2013, a bench of Justices K S Radhakrishnan and Arjan Kumar Sikri ruled that
identity of whistleblower can never be revealed to the accused facing prosecution under
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Thus, from the above information it can be concluded that Whistleblowing is gaining a very important
role in India and thus laws regarding Whistleblowing are being passed for their protection. Every
country needs Whistleblower Protection Laws because when one in putting forward a loophole in any
part of system he is working with, the system may go to any extent to protect its goodwill. So,
Whistleblowers need to be protected and the government should be engaged in building laws to
safeguard the Whistleblowers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
This project would have been incomplete without the following sources, which helped gather very
important and useful data for the purpose of the project. I would like to take this opportunity to
acknowledge the following sources.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower#India
http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
http://www.ethicalsystems.org/content/whistle-blowing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower_protection_in_India
http://www.pcaw.org.uk/whistleblowing-the-inside-story
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/corruption-corporate-frauds-biggest-risks-in-2014-ficcisurvey/1/351123.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Law-against-sexual-harassment-at-workplace-comes-intoeffect/articleshow/27308194.cms
http://www.stopbullying.gov/what-is-bullying/definition/
34

http://www.bullyingstatistics.org/content/bullying-and-suicide.html

35