Whistleblowing In Luxembourg

Whistleblowing, is a term which has been developed in the 1970s in the US and is the process of reporting wrongful, unethical or unlawful behaviour, misconduct internally or externally i.e. to a third party organisation.

A company may be seen as being more transparent and trust worthy by having a robust process and protections for people who wish to report misconduct.

It has become an increasingly relevant issue at work in the last few years as it implies labour law issues, data protection issues and regulatory since under CSSF Circular 12/552, banks are required to have appropriate whistleblowing procedures in place.

Whistleblowing remains a hot topic and has been formally enacted by a law of 13 February 2011 strengthening the means to fight against corruption. This legislation is not dedicated solely to whistleblowing protection but does include provisions on the fight against corruption offences and criminal procedural rules. While the whistleblowing protection legislation amends pre-existing codes of laws or statutes, it is a standalone and comprehensive legislation providing whistleblowing protection.

LABOUR LAW

The law dated 13 February 20111 strengthening the means to fight against corruption and amending the Luxembourg Labour law Code, the Code of criminal procedure law, the Criminal code Penal Code, the Law dated 16 April 1979 determining civil servants' status and the Law dated 24 December 1985 determining local civil servants' status.

The law of 13 February 2011 added a section to the Labour Code on the protection of the employees against corruption, traffic of influence and the misuse of privileged information.

There is no general obligation for private individuals to denounce criminal offences known to them.

Employees who report a colleague's misconduct to the employer, or wrongdoing by the company to the competent authorities may face retaliation up to a dismissal.

→ According to this law, an employer is not authorised to retaliate against the person who has filed a complaint or informed the employer of any wrongdoing. Assuming that an employee is victim of an adverse reaction of its employer, the employer bears the burden of proof to justify that the negative influence on the employee does not stem from retaliation against the whistleblowing action.

Any wrongful retaliation gives rise to damages covering the actual loss suffered.

An employee cannot be a victim of reprisals because of his/her protests or refusal opposed to a fact that he/she...