Read the untranslated law here: http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/atto/serie_generale/caricaArticoloDefault/originario?atto.dataPubblicazioneGazzetta=2015-05-14&atto.codiceRedazionale=15A03551&elenco30giorni=false&atto.tipoProvvedimento=DECRETO
Part I-General questions 1. Survey of current legislation. The introduction into national law by the appropriate level of the employee (public and private) who reports misconduct from within the working environment is provided for in international conventions (UN, OECD, Council of Europe) ratified by Italy, as well as recommendations of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, sometimes in a binding manner, sometimes in the form of invitation to fulfil. November 6, 2012, law # 190 (provisions on the prevention and punishment of corruption and illegality in public administration) incorporated those solicitations, albeit limited to the sphere of public administration, with the provision of art. 1, paragraph 51, which introduces the art. 54-bis Legislative Decree March 30, 2001, n. 165 (General Labour Law Standards employed by public authorities), by providing that: "cases of liability by way of slander or libel, i.e. for the same title under article 2043 of the civil code, the judicial authority or civil servant who denounces the Court of Auditors, or referring to their immediate superior misconduct by coming to their knowledge by reason of the employment relationship can't be punished, dismissed or subjected to a discriminatory measure, whether direct or indirect, having an effect on working conditions on grounds directly or indirectly linked to the complaint ". The same rule discipline, then, in the following paragraphs, the revelation of the name of the reporting ban trend in disciplinary proceedings, the control that the Department of public service must exercise on any discriminatory disciplinary proceedings, the subtraction of signals from the right of access referred to in law no August 7, 1990. 241 (new rules on administrative procedure). The provision invoked only outlines a general and abstract protection: it must be completed with verses for more concrete measures to protect the employee, which-to make your report-must be able to rely on effective and efficient protection that prevents exposure of discriminatory measures. This protection is, then, in the objective interest of sorting, functional to the emergence of phenomena of corruption and maladministration. The protection must be provided by all parties who receive alerts: firstly by the administration of issuing membership, secondly by other authorities who, through reporting, can activate their powers of investigation and sanction, the national anti-corruption authority (A.N.AC.), the judicial authorities and the Court of Auditors. The current national anti-corruption Plan (PNA), at § 3.1.11, leads the employee protection indicating expressly misconduct between general actions and measures aimed at the prevention of corruption, particularly among those mandatory as governed directly by the law, therefore, the Government must put in place and implement. Specifically, the plan provides that public bodies pursuant to art. 1, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. 165/2001 are required to take the necessary technical measures to implement the guardianship of the employee making the reports referred to in art. 54-bis of said Decree. The adoption of the necessary steps must be planned under the three-year plan to prevent corruption (PTPC) as an intervention to achieve with timeliness. The remembered discipline and has been inserted by Decree-Law No 90 June 24, 2014 (urgent measures for simplification and administrative transparency and efficiency of judicial offices), converted into law August 11, 2014, # 114, first, that has changed, with art. 31, the text of art. 54-bis by introducing the A. N.AC. as recipient of the reports on the other (with article 19, paragraph 5) ruled that the A. N.AC. «receive news and reports of abuse, even in the forms of art. 54-bis of Legislative Decree No 165 March 30, 2011». THE A. N.AC., therefore it is called upon to manage, in addition to reports from its employees for tort occurred within its own structure, also reports that employees of other administrations may target pursuant to article 54 bis recalled. The new legislation requires, therefore, A. N.AC. to regulate the procedures through which the authority receives and manages such reports. In this context it has to be stressed that the A. N.AC. intends to fulfil its task in full respect of the subjective and objective scope identified by the law mentioned above. In this regard, it should be noted that art. 54-bis refers exclusively to public employees and assumes the identification of the reporting agent whose name must in any case be kept private. Therefore, these guidelines, aimed at providing application guidelines the provisions in question, cannot disregard such indication; They therefore do not govern methods of treatment and management of other types of signals such as those from citizens or businesses or anonymous reports. The authority can also receive these types of reports on which based much of its supervisory activities; modalities for receiving and managing these reports will, however, treatment other than those specifically provided for in art. 54-bis for the protection of the public servant. As regards procedural aspects, the guidelines indicate the procedures that the A. N.AC. intends to follow for the management of reports of which it is addressed and that could be a useful reference for administrations required to follow the art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001. The authority may not emphasize, however, the uncertainty of regulation that characterizes the matter. In that regard, it calls for an intervention of the legislator intended to clarify issues of interpretation still open, some of which are regularly reported. 2. basis of power adjustment of A. N.AC. on the subject. The authority believes that it is a general power of regulation on the protection of the public servant who reports misconduct, starting from the protection which must be provided by the administration of the same employee. Such power is part of to address corruption prevention measures against all public administrations and private bodies controlled, participated, regulated or funded by the State, in accordance with art. 19, paragraph 15, of Decree No 90/2014. The standard has moved to A. N.AC. the functions of art. 4, paragraph 1, lett. a) to c) of law No. 190/2012, first in the Department of civil service, including to provide the PNA. Taking account of the progress of A. N.AC. address functions and supervise the Government adopted effective measures to protect the public employee whistleblower, the Authority considers that the Department of public service, when receiving reports of discriminatory actions towards an employee who has detected a fault, please inform periodically the authority. How far expressed the necessity that the determined conclusively, A. N.AC. adopt an act of General volume control: what happens with the approval of these guidelines, which, on the one hand, are intended to provide guidance regarding the measures which Governments should take to protect the confidentiality of the identity of employees who report misconduct and, on the other hand, give account of the procedures developed by A.N.AC. to protect the confidentiality of the identity of both the employees of other administrations that transmit to the authority a report, both of its employees who report misconduct. The objective of this Act is, therefore, dictate a discipline aimed at encouraging civil servants to report offences of which they are aware in the context of the employment relationship, but want to ensure their effective protection. These guidelines propose a procedural model for the management of reports which takes into account the need to protect the confidentiality of the employee who sends them. Every administration in the light of these principles, can adapt the proposed model based on organizational needs. Before the final adoption authority has seen fit to submit these guidelines to a public consultation in order to acquire, on the part of stakeholders, elements and useful comments. To assess the degree of achievement of objectives and, in particular, the systems and measures for the protection of the employee who reports misconduct adopted by public administrations, after 12 months after adoption of these guidelines will be made a verification procedure adjustment's impact. Part II-scope. 1. Subjective scope. Government and "servants." The art. 54-bis on the protection of the employee who reports misconduct was introduced by law no 190/2012 as news to the d.lgs. # 165/2001; in accordance with art. 1, paragraph 59, of law no 190/2012: ' the provisions of the prevention of corruption referred to in paragraphs 1 to 57 of this article, the direct implementation of the principle of impartiality under article 97 of the Constitution, are applied in all the authorities referred to in article 1, paragraph 2, of legislative decree March 30, 2001, no. 165, as amended ". These two provisions guide the interpreter in the detection of subjective scope of application of the standard, defined with reference to organisational structures within which protection measures should be laid down, both to those directly protected. A. with regard to the organisational structures, you must treat public administrations under art. 1, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001, as amended. The concept of public administration must be classified, then, definitely non-territorial bodies governed by public law of national, regional or local, of any denomination, established, supervised or funded by public administrations, I mean all non-economic public bodies. B. as regards the subjects directly protected, article. 54-bis refers specifically to civil servants who, by reason of their employment relationship, are aware of misconduct. About the identification of the subjects related to the category of civil servants indicated in the standard, in view of the importance that these reports may have for purpose to prevent corruption, the Authority considers that there are within the Government employees under art. 1, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001. The notion of civil servant are therefore included both employees with employment relationship under private law (article 2, paragraph 2) that, depending on the peculiarities of their respective jurisdictions, employees with employment relationship under public law (article 3 of that Decree). 2. Distinction between anonymous and confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity. As regards the definition of the concept of ' civil servant who report abuse», it is necessary to refer to the ratio of the standard, which is to ensure that the employee became aware of misconduct by reason of the employment relationship, fails to report them for fear of suffering adverse consequences. For this reason, article. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001 forces the Administration who is reporting to ensure the confidentiality of the identity of who you expose yourself. For this purpose the procedure for escalation management must ensure the confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity since receiving the report and in any later stage. Of course the guarantee of confidentiality assumed that the complainant makes known its identity. Thus, in the present case is not provided by the standard as "a civil servant who report abuse", that the person who, in the report, it is not knowable. In essence, the purpose of the standard is to ensure the protection of the employee, keeping his identity confidential, only in the case of reports from civil servants to find and recognizable. It remains stationary, as also provided for in the current PNA, particularly in § b. 12.1, the authority shall also take into consideration the anonymous reports where these are adequately detailed and made in great detail, where I mean to be able to bring out facts and situations according to their relationship to certain contexts. Sending anonymous reporting and processing takes place, however, through different channels and different from those established for the purpose of these guidelines. In other words, anonymous reporting, although in special cases may be the subject of consideration by the A. N.AC., don't fall for expressed will of the legislator, directly within the scope of art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001. Reaffirming that the protection provided for in that article cannot but affect the civil servant who identifies himself (otherwise, protection cannot be ensured) and, in any case, according to the wording of the rule, the protection granted is about retaliation that may take place in the context of the employment relationship and not those of another type. It remains also the distinct rules governing public servants and public servants who, in the presence of specific assumptions, are burdened by a real duty to report without delay, but not only, corruption offences, by virtue of the provisions of the combined provisions of art. 331 of the code of criminal procedure and articles. 361 and 362 of the Penal Code. The obligation to report in accordance with the above-mentioned criminal code and criminal procedure and the possibility to report malfunctions and malfeasance as a civil servant in accordance with art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001 have a different emphasis. Discipline the criminal justice system is based on a real obligation to report to the judicial authorities, including but not limited to, related to offences of bribery, limited to certain categories of persons and in the presence of specific assumptions. The rule contained in art. 54-bis, as well as having a subjective and objective scope wider, it is particularly aimed at defining the regime of protection of reporting persons, civil servants, from the subjects that the reporting may or must be made. Reporting to the supervisor, in charge of prevention of corruption or the A. N.AC., it does not replace, where presuppositions, the Judicial authority and allows to administering or A. N.AC. to carry out the necessary assessments about how corruption prevention measures adopted pursuant to law no 190/2012 and acquire items for strengthening their effectiveness. 3. purpose of reporting. The art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001 expressly provides that the civil servant to report the "misconduct of coming to their knowledge by reason of the employment relationship". A. in the opinion of the authority, the misconduct reporting object worthy of protection include not only the full range of crimes against the public administration in title II, chapter I, of the Penal Code (i.e. the assumptions of corruption for the exercise of the function, corruption to act contrary to official duties and corruption in judicial, governed respectively 318, 319 and 319 articles.-ter of the code) But even situations where, in the course of administrative activities, there is abuse by a person of the power entrusted to him in order to obtain private benefits, as well as the facts that-regardless of the criminal-is a malfunction of the Administration due to the use for private purposes of the functions attributed, including pollution of administrative action ab externo. Consider, by way of example, to cases of waste, nepotism, demansionamenti, repeated failure to comply with the procedural time, non-transparent recruitment, accounting irregularities, misrepresentation, violation of industrial safety and environmental standards. What appears online, however, with the concept of corruption took a civil service department in the circular reference # 1/2013 and especially in the current PNA (§ 2.1) which aims to cover the various situations in which, in the course of administrative activities, there is the abuse of power by a person entrusted to him for the purpose of private gain. B. The misconduct reported, however, should cover situations where the subject could come directly to knowledge ' on grounds of employment ' and, therefore, include certainly how learned by virtue of the Office covered but also the news that have been acquired during and/or due to the performance of job duties, albeit randomly. In the event of a transfer, command, detachment (or similar situations) of the employee at another Board, these can also refer to events that took place in Government Department other than the one on which he served at the time of reporting. In such a case, the contracting authority which receives the alert forwards it anyway to the Administration where the facts relate, according to the criteria and conditions laid down by the latter, or A. N.AC ... They are not deserving of protection alerts based on mere suspicion or rumor: what's in that it is both necessary and take into account the interests of third parties subject to the information in the report, both avoid that administration authority or carries out internal inspection activities likely to be of little use anyway and expensive. In any case, given the spirit of the standard-that is to foster collaboration of those who work within the public administrations for the emergence of corruptive phenomena-in the opinion of the authority and the employee must be assured of the actual occurrence of the allegations and the author thereof, being instead only that the employee, according to your knowledge, considers it highly probable that there has been a criminal offence in the sense above. In this perspective it is appropriate that reports are substantiated as possible and offer the largest number of items in order to enable the Administration to carry out the necessary verifications. 4. conditions for protection. The employee who reports misconduct is kept free from consequences prejudicial in discipline and protected in the event of adoption of "discriminatory measures, direct or indirect, having an effect on working conditions on grounds directly or indirectly linked to the complaint". The norm, in essence, is aimed at protecting the employee who, because of your report, you might see compromised their working conditions. As provided for by art. 54-bis, paragraph 1, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001 such protection, however, is a limit in cases of liability under libel or defamation or for the same title in accordance with art. 2043 of the civil code ". Also in line with the indications that come from international bodies, the protection provided for by the said art. 54-bis has found application when the behavior of the public employee who reports an unhealthy type of offence of slander or libel or is in good faith, to be understood as a failure by his willingness to expose what, in international standards, defines a «malicius report ". Protection does not therefore application in cases where the reporting back false information made with intent or gross negligence. The norm is, however, incomplete in relation to the identification of when that protection must be granted guarantee ceases. There is, in fact, a generic reference to criminal liability for libel or defamation or non-contractual civil liability, which means that these are established in court. Termination of guardianship should descend, then, from the determination of criminal liability (for slander or libel) or civil (for responsibility art. 2043 of the Civil Code) and, therefore, would seem to need a judicial sentence. Aware of the gap in the law, given the delicacy of the matter and the need to provide interpretive signs to allow the application of the standard, the Authority considers that only if there is a judgment of first instance unfavorable to signaling an end to the conditions of protection of the same. In accordance with art. 54-bis, paragraph 2, the Administration is obliged to provide under any disciplinary proceedings initiated against reported, confidentiality of identity of the complainant. The standard gives already a specific indication by providing that, if the contested charge is based on other elements and objective evidence in the possession of the administration or that it has independently acquired regardless of reporting, issuing's identity cannot be revealed without his or her consent. Instead, when the dispute giving rise to the disciplinary procedure is based solely on the complaint of a civil servant, one who is subject to disciplinary action can reach the name of reporting, even in the absence of the consent of the latter, only if it is "absolutely essential" for his defence. The authority is aware that the identification of assumptions that are weakening the confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity is crucial because, on the one hand, the guarantee of confidentiality is one of the conditions that encourage public servant to expose themselves reporting was unlawful phenomena '; on the other, allows the Government to give proper application to the Institute. The standard does not provide information. Having regard to the importance of the issue, on what would be required of the legislator clarifier, the Authority considers that it is for the disciplinary officer to assess, at the request of the person concerned, whether the condition of absolute knowledge of the name of ' maintain reporting for the purpose of Defense. In any case, both in case of acceptance of this instance, and in case of refusal, the head of disciplinary procedures should adequately motivate the choice as provided for by law no 241/1990. It is appropriate, however, that the head of disciplinary procedures becomes aware of the name of reporting only when the interested party requests the same identity is known for his defense. Affect the head of disciplinary obligations of conduct, aimed at the protection of the confidentiality of the reporting, which are held responsible for the prevention of corruption and any components of the support group. In accordance with art. 54-bis, paragraph 4, the reporting is still removed from the access provided by art. 22 and following of the Law # 241/1990. Part III-procedure for the protection of the confidentiality of the identity of the employee in BCS. 1. the role of the person responsible for the prevention of corruption. The procedure for handling reports has as main purpose to protect the confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity at each stage (from reception to management later), also in dealings with third parties where the administration or A. N.AC. had to ask for the verification or for subsequent reporting initiatives. In order to ensure the protection of confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity. N.AC. considers that the management of reports should start with sending the report to the person in charge of the prevention of corruption of the administration. The norm, however, indicates that if the complainant fails to make a complaint to the judicial authorities, the Court of Auditors or A. N.AC., "referring to his immediate superior". In the opinion of the authority, when interpreting legal provisions must take account, first, of the fact that, at the administrative level, the system of corruption prevention governed in law No. 190/2012 hinges on charge of corruption prevention to which is entrusted the delicate and important task of proposing instruments and measures to combat corruptive phenomena. He is, therefore, to consider also the subject functionally competent to judge any wrongdoing in order to prepare, as a result, measures to strengthen the plan of prevention of corruption, penalty, however, the activation of specific forms of liability against it. Secondly, we must take into account that in administrations with complex organizations offices and its hierarchical levels are varied with the resulting criticality organizational skills in the creation of an effective system to protect the identities of agents. Having regard to the ratio of the norm, role, and responsibilities of the person responsible for the prevention of corruption and the need to avoid excessive organizational constraints with administrations, pending legislative action in this regard, the Authority considers it highly desirable that the administrations and bodies provide that the alerts are sent directly to the person in charge of the prevention of corruption. If the reports affect the charge of corruption prevention stakeholders can send the same directly to A. N.AC ... In order to strengthen measures to protect the confidentiality of the identity of the whistleblower, administrations should introduce codes of conduct adopted pursuant to art. 54, paragraph 5, of the aforesaid d.lgs. # 165/2001, specific forms of responsibility both on the part of the responsible for the prevention of corruption both in respect of persons managing the messages and that are part, for reasons of protection of the complainant, a small group dedicated to this. It should be noted, however, that in accordance with art. 1, paragraph 14, of the law # 190/2012 violations by employees of the administration of corruption prevention measures envisaged in the plan of prevention of corruption, including the protection of the employee who reports misconduct pursuant to art. 54-bis, it is punishable to disciplinary action. 2. How to: General principles. In order to avoid that the employee fails to report misconduct for fear of being discriminatory measures, it is appropriate that, to ensure efficient management of reports, they have a system that comprises a part of organization and a technological part, intertwined. The organisational part mainly concerns the confidentiality of whistleblower protection policies: they refer to both the regulatory framework and political choices and management capacities of the individual public institution. The technological part concerns the application system for managing signals: it includes the definition of the information flow of the process with actors, roles, responsibilities and tools necessary to its operation (the architecture of the system hardware and software). To protect the employee reporting irregularities and ensure the effectiveness of the reporting process alarm management system must be able to: manage alerts transparently through a procedure defined and communicated with certain terms for the start and the end of the investigation; protect the confidentiality of the identity of the employee making the report; protect the entity that manages the signals from pressure and direct and indirect discrimination; protect the confidentiality of the content of the report and the identity of any products marked; allow the complainant, through appropriate tools, to check the progress of the inquiry. The Administration must provide suitable care in order to correctly identify the reporting and get, in addition to the identity, the capacity and the role; separate details identifying the reporting by the contents of the report, foreseeing the adoption of substitute codes of identification data, so that the report might be tried in anonymous mode and make possible the subsequent Association of reporting with the identity of the whistleblower in cases where this is strictly necessary; do not allow to trace the identity of the complainant if any disciplinary responsibility of reported: this due to the fact, already mentioned, that the whistleblower's identity cannot be revealed without his or her consent, unless his knowledge is absolutely indispensable for the defence of the accused as provided for by art. 54-bis, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001; to maintain, as much as possible, also with reference to the needs of inquiry, the contents of the report during the whole phase of operations. In that regard, it is recalled that the complaint is removed from the access provided for in art. 22 and following of the Law # 241/1990. In order to protect the confidentiality of the identity of the whistleblower, the management of reports made through the use of computer procedures is largely preferable in terms of acquisition and management of reports involving the physical presence of the complainant; It is in any case necessary supporting computer system is designed in such a way as to ensure adequate information security. In that regard, in addition to the correct identification of the complainant, it is necessary to implement the audit mode of access to the system, whose consultation should be reserved exclusively to the persons entitled to it. The system, in addition to tracking the operations performed, must offer sufficient guarantees to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of data and information and through this will be captured, processed and communicated appropriately in accordance with the procedure established by the management of reports. It is recommended, in particular, the adoption of secure protocols and standards for data transport (such as SSL) as well as the use of end-to-end encryption tools for the contents of the reports and any accompanying documentation. It is fitting, therefore, that the Administration carry out a risk analysis in information management to identify and take appropriate technical and organisational security measures both. It also recommends the adoption of a suitable organizational model that defines responsibilities at all stages of the process of management of reports, with particular attention to aspects of safety and handling information. These measures are specific application in relation to the characteristics of the computer system created and, typically, they fit under the principals of technical and organisational information security provided by the Administration in the management of information systems. In order to ensure the security and confidentiality of information collected, you must also make appropriate choices regarding: data retention mode (physical, logical, hybrid); privacy policies through computer tools (decoupling issuing data with respect to information related to reporting, data encryption and accompanying documents); data access policies (officials enabled, administrators of the computer system); security policies (e.g. periodic change of passwords); storage time (shelf life data and documents). The need to better manage the database of reports it is crucial even in the context of a systematic analysis that goes beyond the info about the individual case. The data collected through the reports and investigations can provide important information of a general nature (such as the types of violations) from which to infer elements for the identification of critical areas of management over which intervene in terms of improvement of the quality and effectiveness of the system of corruption prevention. This information should be used, among other things, to update or add to the risk map of the plan for the prevention of corruption, the code of conduct and/or the code of ethics, as well as to consider new or different tools of response. Remember that the data and the documents referred to in the report, which could also be or contain sensitive data, should be treated in compliance with legislation on personal data protection. 3. roles and stages of the procedure. Under the plan to prevent corruption, adopted by the management procedure, address reports by defining roles and stages. In this process the role of the person responsible for the prevention of corruption is central because, as already pointed out, it is the recipient of the same as the person responsible for carrying out a preliminary investigation of the facts reported. Where organizational size permits, the Administration can identify another Member to receive and manage messages along to the person in charge of the prevention of corruption; said subject should not be identified among the managers of the offices operating in areas of risk identified by art. 1, paragraph 16, of law no 190/2012. In any case, the Manager, also in relation to the internal organization of the Administration, can avail of a working group, whose members, with multidisciplinary expertise, must be clearly identified in an appropriate organizational act. For the operation of the unit must be provided for cases of abstention of some components in the event of possible conflicts of interest. The band members are subject to the same confidentiality restrictions and subject to the same liability which is the responsible for the prevention of corruption. Of this working group may not be members of the members of the disciplinary process since the lack of references to standard predicted Office construe aimed at highlighting the role of apparatus ' of the same within the subsequent activities of assessment of the facts reported. If you are not manifestly unfounded elements of the fact, the manager forwards the report to the competent third parties-even to adopt consequent measures-such as the Manager of the structure where the fact occurred to capture instructors, only where there is no type of offence; the disciplinary Office, for any disciplinary liability profiles; the judicial authority, the Court of Auditors and the A. N.AC., for profiles of competence; the Department of civil service. The protection of confidentiality of the whistleblower must be ensured even when the alert is forwarded to third parties. In the case of transmission to persons within the Administration, must be forwarded only the contents of the report, expunging all references from which it is possible to trace the identity of the whistleblower. Internal Administration inform the actors concerned with the prevention of corruption of the adoption of measures by jurisdiction. In the case of transmission to the judicial authorities, the Court of Auditors or to the Department of civil service, the transmission must be making sure to point out that this is a report received from a person to whom the sorting recognize greater protection of privacy pursuant to art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001. The articulation of the procedure at different stages is outlined, purely by way of example, in annex 1a. 4. the management of A. N.AC. reports of misconduct. 4.1. The hypothesis of reports from employees. N.AC. about misconduct within the authority. THE A. N.AC. He plans to adopt a computerized management model, which will develop according to the steps below: the issuing you credit on a computing platform accessible only to internal users, in which it is developed the application of management of reports; After forwarding bug, the reporting system receives an identification code useful for subsequent logons; signaling data (together with any accompanying documents) are automatically forwarded to the person designated by the authority to start the investigation that is responsible for the prevention of corruption; the reporting agent can monitor the progress of the investigation by accessing the alarm management system and using the identification code received; the Director of corruption prevention, which possibly can avail of an ad hoc working group, takes charge of the signaling for a first cursory investigation. If necessary, requires clarification from the complainant and/or any others involved in reporting with the adoption of the necessary precautions; based on the evaluation of the facts contained in the report, the prevention of corruption (with the possible designated working group component) can decide, in case of evident and manifestly unfounded, to archive the alert. Otherwise, consider who to forward the report in relation to the profiles of the following subjects: Executive was unlawful ' found the structure where it is due to the fact; Office which deals with disciplinary authority; Judicial authority; The Court of Auditors; Department of civil service; the head of the corruption prevention department periodically shall report to the President on the number and type of reports received and taken into account in order to update the plan to prevent corruption. The President, on the basis of what he communicated by those responsible for the prevention of corruption, reports regularly to the Council; the data and documents the subject of alerts are treated in accordance with the law and access to documents, authorized persons, it is properly governed by security policies for authority and the most restrictive security policies laid down in the operational manual for the use of the management of reports; the Authority reserves the right to publish a summary of the number of reports received and their progress, with methods such as to guarantee the confidentiality of the identity of agents. At the end of the activities of realization of the computerized system for the management of reports of misconduct, the authority will reuse the available free software and documentation for all Governments who request it. 4.2. The management of reports of misconduct from employees of other public administrations. Even for signals coming from employees of other public administrations authority you will ' of an automated system of management which ensures the protection of confidentiality of the whistleblower. The outline of the procedure that will be adopted by A.N.A.C. for automated management of reports of misconduct from other administrations is outlined in Annex 1b. The management of reports will be prepared by the head of the anti-corruption Supervision Office, supported by a stable working group designated by an act of the General Secretary. The management of reports is, in the context of institutional activities A.N.AC. plays for the purposes of supervision and control over the application of the rules on prevention of corruption and as such, albeit with the necessary precautions to maintain the confidentiality of the whistleblower, is carried out by the Office routinely in charge of anti-corruption supervision. During the investigation, the Office can request information primarily concerned with the prevention of corruption of the Administration in which occurred the fact reported or, with respect to individual specific situations, such other person in place of apparatus '. The head of the Supervisory Office shall submit to the Council its assessment about the non-obvious unfounded reporting. Analyzed this assessment, the Board shall take a decision on the possible transmission of the report to the judicial authorities and the Court of Auditors to adopt consequent measures. It should be noted that the legislation has a major flaw: it does not contain specific provisions on methods of protection of the confidentiality of the identity of the whistleblower in en route for the alert. N.AC. the judicial authorities and/or the Court of Auditors. The transmission of the report will then also indicating the name of the complainant, but still making sure to point out that this is a report received from a person to whom the sorting recognize greater protection of privacy pursuant to art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001. To this end, the authorities intend to promote the conclusion of memoranda of understanding with the judiciary involved and with the Ministry of Justice, to define the most suitable transmission mode to protect the confidentiality of the identity of agents and content of reports. 4.2.1. transitional arrangements for the management of reports from employees of other public administrations. Since the implementation of information system for management of reports of misconduct will be completed in the medium term, because of its technical complexity, the following are singled out the procedural aspects relating to transitional arrangements. The reports must be submitted by filling out the form published on the website of the authority and given in annex 2 to this resolution taking care, in so far as the representation of fact, to expunge any information that allows you to trace the identity of the whistleblower. You can, however, attach documents considered of interest for the purposes of the investigation of the authority in relation to the events reported. The authorities start investigations without delay concerning reports received, providing the definition of same within 120 days of receipt. Data and documents will be directed to a dedicated email box accessible to only the President and will be the subject of separate registration in a special register reserved. The President assigns the reports received from employees of other administrations to a multidisciplinary working group, coordinated by the head of the anti-corruption Supervision Office. The members of the working group are clearly identified in an appropriate organizational act and are subject to the same confidentiality restrictions and subject to the same responsibilities as identified in the code of conduct that the A. N.AC. plan to update as indicated in part III, § 1, of these guidelines. In the course of the investigation authority, taking care to take all the necessary steps to ensure that the confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity may have been compromised, may require the latter to provide additional elements for the purposes of appropriate investigations. The investigation is carried by the leader of the anti-corruption Supervision Office to the attention of the Council which may decide to seek information and clarification from the responsible for the prevention of corruption of the administration concerned. In this case it won't be transmitted to that Responsible reporting as received by the authorities but they will be shown the contents, possibly after reformulation, so expunging any reference to the identity of the whistleblower. The authority may also decide to forward its report to the judicial authorities and the Court of Auditors. As seen above, in these cases the submission of the report is also indicating the name of the reporting but, however, being careful to point out that this is a report received from a person to whom the sorting recognize greater protection of privacy pursuant to art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001. The data and documents referred to in the report, which could also be sensitive, are treated in compliance with legislation on personal data protection. Part IV-protection of the employee who reports misconduct in private-law entities in public oversight and public organizations. The State legislation expected to be drafted a specific protection for reporting wrongdoing on the part of civil servants ' administrations under art. 1, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001. These guidelines are addressed to public authorities covered by the scope of the said Decree (see supra part II, § 1). The Authority considers, however, that the application of the provisions on the prevention of corruption Act No 190/2012 is being extended even private bodies in public scrutiny of the national and local levels, as well as to public organizations. What also in virtue of a constitutionally oriented interpretation of art. 1, paragraph 60, of that law, contained in the document entitled "Application of the obligations of prevention of corruption by law # 190/2012 at subsidiaries and associated companies by public administrations" adopted jointly by the authority and the Ministry of economy and finance. In the absence of a specific provision on the protection of employees who report misconduct in private-law entities in public oversight and public organizations, the Authority considers it appropriate that these entities from holding and possibly encourage vigilantes under the plan to prevent corruption, the adoption of protective measures similar to those in these guidelines (see in this regard, the guidelines for the implementation of the rules on prevention of corruption and transparency on the part of the companies and the private-law entities controlled and participated by public administrations and public organizations-§ 2.1). With regard, however, to companies and private law bodies attended by Governments, based on the orientation recently expressed by the authority in the cited guidelines, implementation of the legislation on the prevention of corruption acts for these minor charges than those imposed on society in public scrutiny. They are subject to discipline on transparency with respect to activities in the public interest activity. Considered however the participation of public administrations and bearing in mind that the companies and entities mentioned managing public resources, the participating administrations should promote the adoption of measures to encourage employees to report any misconduct institutions themselves working on forms of protection of their privacy. The Authority hopes that the legislature must intervene to bridge the regulatory vacuum above. Part V-enforcement consultants and contractors in any capacity and utility management contributor. The legislation provides that a specific protection is ensured for reporting wrongdoing on the part of civil servants ' administrations under art. 1, paragraph 2, of the d.lgs. # 165/2001. However, it must be considered that public administrations are also subjects that cannot be included among civil servants but who carry out their professional activities within public offices. We refer in particular to employees or consultants, with any type of contract or assignment and for whatever purpose, organs and holders of positions in the offices of direct collaboration of political authority, the employees in any capacity of suppliers of goods or services and who produce works in favor of the administration. With regard to these types of subjects, the code of conduct for public officials, approved by Decree of the President of the Republic April 16, 2013, n. 62 provides that the administrations should extend as far as compatible, obligations of conduct that the same Code establishes for civil servants. To that end, article. 2, paragraph 3, of that p.r.Decree No 62/2013, stipulates that Governments engage in acts of appointment or in a contract of acquisition of collaborations, consultancy or services, appropriate termination clauses or forfeiture of the relationship in the event of a breach of obligations under the code. The authority can not detect how, given the role that these subjects within administrations, it is appropriate to offer them some form of privacy if they wish to expose himself in the first person to report wrongdoing during and/or due to the performance of job duties. The Authority hopes so an intervention of the legislator to extend protective measures similar to those provided for by art. 54-bis of the Italian d.lgs. # 165/2001 also to the mentioned categories of persons, in constant employment relationship or collaboration. In legislation, therefore, the authority can only detect the opportunity that the Government in its corruption prevention Plans to introduce for classes of persons above considered measures protection of privacy similar to those for civil servants. Remember, however, that the extension to such categories of protections provided for by art. 54-bis does not imply an extension of the same also the forms of protection against discrimination which ensures that civil servants civil service department.
Roma, April 28, 2015 President: Canton Deposited at the Secretariat of the Council on May 6, 2015. Secretary: Esposito
Search Translated Laws of Italy