社説:内部告発者保護 不利益扱い防ぐ制度に

August 18, 2014(Mainichi Japan)
Editorial: Strengthen system to protect whistleblowers
社説:内部告発者保護 不利益扱い防ぐ制度に

Many of those who have blown the whistle on wrongdoing involving their colleagues or employers have complained that they have been dismissed or transferred to unimportant divisions.
 勤務している会社や役所の不正を知って内部告発したら、解雇や閑職に追いやられた。そんな訴えが後を絶たない。

The Whistleblower Protection Act came into force eight years ago, but the spirit of the legislation has not been sufficiently respected. The system to protect whistleblowers needs to be reinforced by amending the law or taking other effective measures to prevent those who try to correct an injustice from being treated unfavorably.
 内部告発者を不利益に扱うことを禁じる公益通報者保護法が8年前に施行されたが、法の趣旨が十分に行き渡っているとはいえない。不正を正そうとした人が損をする本末転倒が生じないよう、法改正などによる制度の強化が必要だ。

The law is aimed at protecting workers, including public servants, who blow the whistle on criminal activities they witness at their workplaces to their employers or administrative organs. The Consumer Affairs Agency that enforces the law is hearing the views of experts and those who have experience of blowing the whistle in an effort to grasp the situation of whistleblowing and consider challenges that must be overcome.
 公務員を含む労働者が勤め先での犯罪行為を事業者や行政機関などに内部告発しても保護されることをうたったのが同法だ。所管する消費者庁は現在、内部告発の実情把握と課題検討のため、関係者から意見聴取を進めている。先日は内部告発を理由に不利益処分を受けたとして裁判で争った人たちから意見を聞いた。

The agency has recently interviewed those who have sued their employers for being unfavorably treated at their workplaces in retaliation for blowing the whistle on wrongdoing. One of the victims, an anesthetist who worked at a public hospital, notified high-ranking officials of his workplace that a dentist who had no license as an anesthetist was anesthetizing patients and that a fatal blunder had occurred. However, he was relieved from his post and forced to resign from the hospital. He also blew the whistle to the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry. But the ministry dismissed his complaint on the grounds that “the Whistleblower Protection Act does not apply to retirees” and that “it is prefectural governments that are authorized by the law to receive complaints from whistleblowers and issue recommendations to or take punitive measures against offenders.”
 そのうち公立病院で働いていた麻酔科医は、資格のない歯科医が麻酔をしていることや死亡事故が起きていることを病院幹部に内部告発したが、業務から外され退職を余儀なくされた。さらに厚生労働省に内部告発したが「公益通報者保護法は退職者には適用されない」「法が通報先として認める処分・勧告権限のある行政機関は県になる」との理由で受け付けてもらえなかったという。

These examples have demonstrated that whistleblowers are not being protected despite the legislation. The anesthetist requested that clauses providing punishment against employers that treat whistleblowers unfavorably and requiring administrative organizations to respond to whistleblowers in an appropriate manner be added to the law.
 あぜんとするが、内部告発者が守られていない現状を象徴する例だ。意見聴取に麻酔科医は「不利益な取り扱いをした事業者への罰則導入や内部告発を受けた行政機関の適正な対応の義務付け」を要望した。

The Whistleblower Protection Act prohibits employers from dismissing or demoting employees or cutting their wages in retaliation for blowing the whistle on wrongdoing, but has no punitive clause against violators. Therefore, whistleblowers who have been treated unfavorably by their employers have no choice but to sue their employers to have the damage redressed.
 法は内部告発を理由にした解雇や降格、減給などを事業者に禁じているが、罰則規定はなく、不利益を受けた人は裁判に訴えない限り泣き寝入りになる。

The results of a survey that the Consumer Affairs Agency released last year show that 7 percent of whistleblowers or those who consulted their bosses or administrative organs about wrongdoing at their workplaces have been dismissed, and 21 percent have been unfavorably treated or harassed.
消費者庁が昨年公表した内部通報・相談経験者への調査では、解雇された人は7%、不利益を受けた人と嫌がらせを受けた人はともに21%(複数回答)に上った。

Critics have expressed fears that the introduction of punitive clauses could encourage workers to blow the whistle with evil intent. However, some form of punishments should be introduced against businesses and administrative organs that violate the law.
罰則導入は悪意の告発を増やすと懸念する声もあるが、実態を考慮すれば、違反した事業者には何らかのペナルティーを科すことを検討すべきだ。

Problems involving administrative bodies that receive complaints from whistleblowers should be addressed. In at least one case, an administrative organization leaked the name of an employee who blew the whistle and the details of the worker’s complaint to the company involved, allowing the firm to unfairly punish the whistleblower. As such, there have been calls for a clause to ban administrative bodies from leaking such information.
 内部告発を受ける行政機関側の問題も見過ごせない。告発者の名前や告発内容が行政機関から事業者に筒抜けになり不利益処分を招いたケースがあり、漏えいを禁止する規定を法に新設するよう求める声もある。

There have been calls for the establishment of a third-party body to receive complaints from whistleblowers as administrative bodies often share a mutual interest with businesses. These opinions are worthy of consideration.
 行政機関は事業者と利害が一致して当事者になりうるとの不信感が根強い。そのため告発を受け付ける別の窓口として独立した第三者機関の設置を要望する人もおり、こうした意見にも耳を傾けてほしい。

Whistleblowers tend to be viewed by their colleagues or employers as traitors.
 内部告発者は、ややもすると組織の中で「裏切り者」とのそしりを受けかねない。

However, whistleblowing conducted in a fair manner could save the organizations they work for from an unfortunate predicament, and therefore whistleblowers should be protected.
しかし、正当な告発は組織の窮地を救う手がかりになる可能性があり、守るべき存在である。

毎日新聞 2014年08月18日 02時32分

広告

srachai について

early retired civil engineer migrated from Tokyo to Thailand
カテゴリー: 英字新聞 パーマリンク

コメントを残す

以下に詳細を記入するか、アイコンをクリックしてログインしてください。

WordPress.com ロゴ

WordPress.com アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Twitter 画像

Twitter アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Facebook の写真

Facebook アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Google+ フォト

Google+ アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

%s と連携中