Categories: Insights, Legislation

Tag: Directive, Whistelblowing


4 Nov 2019

Whistleblowing: Italian law and EU Directive compared

On 7 October 2019, the European Council adopted the Directive on the “Protection of individuals who report breaches of EU law“ (known as whistleblowers), i.e. those within the territory of the European Union who report misconduct of which they have become aware in the workplace.

Member States of the Union have two years from the forthcoming date of publication of the Directive in the Official Journal of the European Union, in order to transpose the EU regulations into national law.

The measure aims to harmonise, within the European Union, the regulations on whistleblowing, giving all countries the opportunity to model their national legislation on the basis of best international standards and practices.

In this context, Italian Law 179/2017 will be affected by numerous changes.

Comparison between Italian legislation and the EU Directive

The first aspect intended to be amended concerns the scope. Whilst the Italian law applies only to companies that have adopted management and control models (so called “Organisational Model 231”), the Directive concerns all private companies with more than 50 employees or an annual turnover exceeding €10 million (irrespective, therefore, of the application of Model 231). Small- and medium-sized enterprises are therefore exempted, with the exception of those operating in high-risk sectors (e.g. financial risk or money laundering risk). As regards the public sector, the EU directive leaves it up to the Member States to exempt municipalities with less than ten thousand inhabitants and public bodies with less than fifty employees.

The directive also broadens the scope of protected subjects, including, not only employees, but also self-employed workers, freelancers, consultants, contractors, suppliers, volunteers, trainees, etc. Protection is also extended to informants’ family members and colleagues.

Public authorities and companies receiving a report are required to follow up within three months, otherwise the reporter shall be entitled to publish the information (e.g. via the internet or social media).

In addition, as regards the Italian legislation that refers to “information channels”, the directive provides for the appointment of a company contact person (department or person) responsible for receiving the report to be verified within three months.

The European Directive also covers the sectors subject to reporting. Whilst in Italian legislation the areas covered by the reports concern the offences referred to in Legislative Decree no. 231/2001 (i.e.., “alleged offences”), the European directive, on the other hand, includes additional sectors, such as public procurement, financial services, privacy and data protection, etc.

Lastly, as regards anonymous reports, whilst in Italy, in the public sector, the identification of the reporter is foreseen and, in the private sector, anonymous reports are permitted, the Directive allows for anonymity, leaving it up to the Member States to decide whether public bodies and authorities are obliged to accept these types of alerts.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…