ENVIRONMENT Commissioner Charalambos Theopemptou raised a very interesting issue on his blog. He suggested that Cyprus followed the example of other countries and set up a legal framework for whistle-blowing. This would provide legal protection to any person who reported dishonest or illegal activities in a government department, public organisation or company.
The law would protect such an individual from prosecution, for violating bureaucratic regulations or from wrongful dismissal at a private company. It is aimed at encouraging people to speak out when they are privy to information about wrongdoing or practices that put public health and safety at risk. In the US there has been a law to protect whistle-blowers since 1863 and, although revised, is still in force.
Theopemptou argued that if such a law had been in existence in Cyprus the tragedy in Mari might have been avoided. After all, many people knew that the containers at Mari posed a big risk, but were afraid to go public with their fears, preferring instead, as in the case of the late naval commander, to send memos about the situation to their superiors. This is the bureaucratic way of dealing with problems and, as has been proved, is conclusively ineffective.
But would a law protecting whistle-blowing have made a difference, given the prevailing attitude of keeping your mouth shut so you can get on? Civil servants turn a blind eye to illegalities all the time because they know that this will eventually be rewarded with a promotion, a favourable transfer or the appointment of a relative. This is the way the system has always worked, not only reproducing corruption but also rewarding it. Nobody speaks out because they know that doing so would eventually be penalised.
The public spirit that would encourage a person to put the interests of the community above his own has never been cultivated, let alone rewarded. Being part of the conspiracy of silence and not rocking the boat pays much better, which is why everyone opts for it, turning a blind eye to all types of dishonesty and illegality.
We should not paint too bleak a picture because there are people who occasionally leak information to the media in order to expose dubious dealings in the government. There was even an individual who, more than 20 years ago, exposed the dishonest dealings of a big Church-owned company, even though he lost his job as a result. There have been a few brave, public-spirited individuals in the past and a law protecting whistle-blowers may encourage others to report illegalities.
Admittedly, the law would not change the prevailing attitude overnight, but it would be a start.
