Fragmentation is negatively affecting the effectiveness of whistleblower protection in Malta, a report published by Repubblika on Friday shows.
Repubblika today published a new report examining the effectiveness of whistleblower protection in Malta, particularly in public procurement and financial integrity. The report was presented during Repubblika's seminar on whistleblower protection, organised as part of the events marking the ninth anniversary of the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.
The report, National Whistleblower Protection Ecosystem in the Area of Public Procurement and Financial Integrity in Malta, was prepared by Repubblika as part of the EU co-funded poWer project. It is based on an analysis of Maltese legislation, institutional procedures and interviews with representatives of oversight institutions and legal experts.
The report concludes that Malta has established a relatively comprehensive legal framework for protecting whistleblowers, particularly following amendments introduced in 2021 to implement an EU directive. However, significant weaknesses remain in the practical operation of the system.
The principal problem is fragmentation. Several institutions have responsibilities for investigating procurement irregularities, corruption, financial misconduct and protected disclosures, but there is no sufficiently clear, coordinated system governing how reports are referred between them. Whistleblowers may struggle to identify the appropriate authority, understand which protections apply or determine what happens to their disclosures.
The report also identifies a serious lack of transparency. There are no comprehensive published statistics showing how many procurement-related disclosures are received, how many are investigated, what action follows or whether whistleblowers who suffer retaliation obtain effective remedies. This absence of information makes it impossible to assess confidently whether legal protections actually work.
Although the law protects employees, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and others involved in public procurement, these protections may be difficult to exercise in practice. Individuals reporting wrongdoing can face dismissal, financial losses, damaged commercial relationships or exclusion from future business opportunities. Confidentiality is especially challenging in procurement cases, where the information disclosed may itself reveal the whistleblower's identity.
The report raises particular concerns about anonymous disclosures. Under Maltese law, anonymous reports are generally excluded from protected disclosure status, subject to a narrow exception. This may discourage people who fear identification and retaliation from coming forward.
Another weakness concerns institutional capacity. Whistleblowing officers may lack specialist knowledge of procurement irregularities, while procurement and oversight officials may lack adequate training in protecting whistleblowers, handling confidential information and recognising retaliation.
The report recommends establishing clear national referral procedures, common standards for handling disclosures, stronger confidentiality safeguards, specialised training and regular publication of anonymised information about investigations and outcomes.
Crucially, the research concludes that whistleblowing cannot substitute for effective anti-corruption enforcement and broader safeguards against organised crime and undue influence in public procurement. Without these measures, individuals who expose wrongdoing risk bearing consequences disproportionate to the systemic improvements their disclosures can achieve.
The report calls for a system that is easier to navigate, safer to use and more accountable in practice.
The full report may be found here