The whistleblowing channel: A brief introduction

Part of a functioning compliance system is the so-called whistleblowing channel. Article 31.2. 4 of the Criminal Code requires companies to report possible risks and non-compliance to the competent oversight body.

The ideal way is to establish a communication protocol in order to report irregularities, which is usually implemented through a so-called whistleblowing channel.

For the channel to function properly and serve its purpose, it must meet a number of guarantees.

Confidentiality (and even anonymity) must be guaranteed through appropriate communication systems (emails, phone calls or voice messages, etc.). Likewise, it must be guaranteed that the person making the report will not be threatened with negative reactions. In addition, employees must be adequately informed about the existence, purpose and operation of the system, how to report complaints and how to notify the person concerned.

The body handling the complaints should be independent from the rest of the company organization and should be completely objective, transparent and impartial in investigating and resolving the complaints submitted. Therefore, it is advisable that the person investigating the case is not the same as the person who will ultimately evaluate it and decide on consequences.

The body may be organized as follows:

- Internal: it can be composed of the compliance officer, the directors and an external expert.

- External: which makes impartiality and objectivity more likely.

- Hybrid: the body investigating the case may be organized internally and the evaluating body externally (and vice versa).

Upon receipt of a report, the case can either be (i) closed or (ii) a corresponding case can be created in which the allegations are listed and evidence is collected with the knowledge of the persons involved.

After the investigation is concluded, the body prepares a report recommending actions for an effective investigation of the facts. Once completed, a final report is prepared and sent to the evaluating body and the Compliance Committee (if the bodies are separated as recommended), and to management if so provided.

The evaluating body, in cooperation with the Human Resources Department, shall make a sanction proposal within the established deadline (depending on the significance of the investigated event and in accordance with the Company's Code of Ethics).

Finally, and if necessary, if there are indications of a criminal offense, the management decides together with the Compliance Officer whether the facts should be reported to the Public Prosecutor's Office, whereby the management is ultimately responsible for this decision.

https://lex.ahk.es/de/aktuelles-recht/der-whistleblowing-kanal-eine-kurze-einfuehrung