Despite whistle-blowers exposing unethical behaviors, dishonesty, and misconduct in organizations, they often face persecutions. Does Australia offer sufficient guards to protect whistle-blowers?
Opening Paragraph (Including Thesis Statement)
The Australian authorities provides equal protection to its citizens beneath various Acts regulating individual rights. Even though whistle-blowers appear as sources of conflicts in many countries, Australia protects these activists beneath both state and federal level. The reason for their protection is because of the role they play in disclosing certain quintessential information. Among them include matters connected to corruption, countrywide security, a threat to public or immigration. Even the boards also play a critical position to ensure that the whistle-blowers enjoy the freedom of expression in Australia. They argue that these individuals bring a corporate misconduct to light early before the corporations inject severe losses. Consequently, the government benefits by detecting the wrongdoing and eventually prevents any harm (Lewis, 2016).
Due to the position these individuals occupy in an economy, Australia introduced whistle-blower protection laws, which are still in force even today. The Public Act (2013) provides a detailed framework which ensures that Commonwealth public sector whistle-blowers are free to report a suspected misconduct in the Australian public sector (Khemani, 2012).
Topic Sentences
Australian law permits those who become whistleblowers to present the allegations for public awareness either internally or externally (Lewis, 2016). The former allows the individuals to use people within the accused organization to ensure that their allegations reach the intended parties. External means is whereby the country permits whistleblowers to bring information to light through third parties which exist in the external environment of the accused organization.
The protection of the whistle-blowers is further subdivided into two classifications: public and private. It depends on the sector in which a person decides to whistle-blow. However, private whistle-blowers are more protected than their counterparts because whistle-blowers often experience criminal charges and custodial sentences (Khemani, 2012).
The protection is also limited to accurate information. For example, only civil servants who disclose information regarding illegal conduct and abuse of public trust enjoy the freedom covered by the law. On the other hand, Khemani (2012) explores that The National Security Amendment Act (No. 1) 2014 allows the stakeholders to punish whistleblowers who leak information about Intelligence Operation in Australia.
Academic Reference with Reasoning
Khemani, M. (2012). The protection of national security whistleblowers: Imperative but impossible a critical appraisal of the scope and adequacy of whistleblower protection laws for national security whistleblowers in Australia. SSRN Electronic Journal, 4(11). doi:10.2139/ssrn.1412112.
The article explains the approaches and consequences of protecting Australian whistle-blowers to the national safety of the country. There is an overview of how AICD protects whistle-blowers through lawyers and constitution. The article is important because it puts public attention into the awareness of impacts of corporate whistle-blowing protection on the international security.
Lewis, D. (2016). Australian whistleblowers, reasonable belief, and data protection issues. Industrial Law Journal, 35(3), 324-328. doi:10.1093/indlaw/dwl025
The article provides the information regarding how the board motivates whistleblowers in Australia. Through the article, we understand the significance of protecting whistleblowers such as bringing corporate wrongdoings into the light, which eventually helps the public to detect and prevent the effects of various malpractices.
References
Khemani, M. (2012). The protection of national security whistleblowers: Imperative but impossible a critical appraisal of the scope and adequacy of whistleblower protection laws for national security whistleblowers in Australia. SSRN Electronic Journal, 4(11). doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1412112.
Lewis, D. (2016). Australian whistleblowers, reasonable belief, and data protection issues. Industrial Law Journal, 35(3), 324-328. doi: 10.1093/indlaw/dwl025.
