whistleblower
Enable an agent to recognise a person acting as a whistleblower, assess their reporting situation and support appropriate next steps without exposing them or treating allegations as established facts.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an agent to recognise a person acting as a whistleblower, assess their reporting situation and support appropriate next steps without exposing them or treating allegations as established facts.
A whistleblower is a person who reports or discloses suspected wrongdoing encountered through work or another institutional relationship to a recipient capable of investigating, addressing, or exposing it.
It can be Help the person describe a concern while separating observations, allegations and inferences.; Map potential recipients and identify conflicts or unresolved channel requirements.; Prepare a disclosure summary for the person's review and explicit sending authorization.; Assess identifying details and minimise unnecessary disclosure of personal information.; Track acknowledgements, follow-up requests and reported adverse treatment.; Identify needs for independent advice, practical support or urgent safety assistance..
Distinguishing features
The person reports or attempts to report suspected wrongdoing rather than merely possessing relevant information as a witness.
Record how the person obtained relevant information; distinguish involvement or access from repeating a public allegation.
Distinguish the wrongdoing concern from a solely personal disagreement, while allowing a personal grievance and whistleblowing to coexist.
Distinguish the reporting person from a journalist, investigator or advocate who receives or relays the disclosure; one person may hold multiple roles.
Do not infer formal protection, factual correctness or a particular motive merely from the whistleblower label.
Scope
+ The person's relationship to the activity or organisation about which they report
+ The suspected wrongdoing and the person's basis for reporting it
+ Actual or attempted disclosures, recipients and reporting channels
+ Identity exposure, confidentiality preferences and consent
+ Reported retaliation, support needs and unresolved protection eligibility
- General human biology, taxonomy and life stages
- Full organisational governance and compliance models
- Investigation of wrongdoing and adjudication of responsibility
- Reporting-platform implementation and evidence-storage infrastructure
- Complete jurisdiction-specific legal rules and legal representation
Characteristics
- Relationship to reported activity
- Current or former worker, contractor, supplier, volunteer, participant, other relationship, unknown Explains access to information and dependencies that may affect reporting choices and exposure.
- Basis of knowledge
- Direct observation, records accessed, participant account, second-hand account, inference, mixed, unknown Separates what the person knows from what they suspect or have been told.
- Disclosure stage
- Considering reporting, attempted, submitted, acknowledged, follow-up ongoing, closed, unknown Distinguishes a prospective reporter from a person who has made a disclosure and guides the next support action.
- Recipient relationship
- Internal recipient, external oversight recipient, journalist, public audience, other, unknown; record per disclosure Different recipients create different handling, exposure and follow-up conditions.
- Identity exposure
- Unknown to recipient, known to restricted recipients, publicly identified, suspected re-identification, unknown Supports realistic handling of anonymity, confidentiality and indirect identification.
- Reported adverse treatment
- None reported, feared, alleged, under assessment, substantiated by identified authority, disputed, unknown Records possible retaliation without assuming either its absence or its causal connection to reporting.
- Protection assessment
- Not assessed, assessment pending, potentially applicable, confirmed within specified scope, contested, unavailable within specified scope, unknown Keeps protection claims tied to a particular framework, assessment source and date.
Also called
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 6 bundles · 11 layers · 17 findings · 30 questions.
Whistleblower role and boundaries Locate the person in relation to the concern and establish what the whistleblower designation means in this case.
The registry identifies a living person, but whistleblowing is a contextual role rather than a biological kind.
Connection to wrongdoing
Describe the person's access, involvement and dependencies.
Access and involvement
Record how the person encountered the suspected wrongdoing, including any participation, without presuming innocence or culpability.
- What relationship gave the person access to the reported activity or information? provenance
- Was the person an observer, affected party, participant or some combination? boundary
Role designation
Separate prospective reporting, actual disclosures and attributed whistleblower status.
Designation basis
Record who applies the label and distinguish descriptive usage from formal recognition.
- Has the person attempted or made a disclosure, or are they still considering one? definition
- Who calls this person a whistleblower, and does that designation rely on a specified institutional or legal definition? provenance
Concern and knowledge Represent the substance and evidential basis of the concern without deciding whether the allegation is true.
Useful support depends on distinguishing suspected wrongdoing from the person's observations and interpretations.
Reported wrongdoing
Identify the conduct at issue and its asserted significance.
Concern boundary
Capture the alleged conduct, affected parties and claimed breach or harm.
- What conduct is being reported, and why does the person consider it wrongdoing? definition
- Which parts concern a personal grievance, wider harm or both? boundary
Knowledge and corroboration
Distinguish direct knowledge, supporting material and unresolved inference.
Claim support
Connect each material allegation to its stated basis without encouraging further access or unnecessary copying.
- Which statements derive from direct observation, existing records, another person's account or inference? provenance
- What material supports or challenges the concern, and what remains unverified? provenance
- What handling restrictions require assessment before supporting material is copied or shared? action
Disclosure path and response Track how the concern reaches recipients and what happens afterward.
A person can make several disclosures with different recipients, exposure conditions and outcomes.
Recipient and channel
Describe intended or actual reporting routes and recipient suitability.
Reporting route
Record the selected recipient, channel and reasons for choosing that route.
- Who is intended to receive the disclosure, and what responsibility do they have for this concern? action
- Is the recipient implicated in the allegation or otherwise subject to a conflict that could affect handling? boundary
- What has the person explicitly authorised this agent to prepare or transmit? action
Disclosure follow-up
Track reporting events and responses separately from investigation outcomes.
Response history
Maintain a chronology of attempts, submissions, acknowledgements and requests.
- When was each disclosure attempted or submitted, and what confirms receipt? provenance
- What response or follow-up is outstanding, and which dates are documented rather than assumed? action
Identity and exposure Represent identity handling, consent and ways the reporting person could become identifiable.
Removing a name may leave enough contextual detail to identify a whistleblower.
Identity handling
Separate actual identity visibility from desired confidentiality.
Visibility and consent
Record who knows the person's identity and what further sharing they permit.
- Which recipients know the person's identity, and which are expected to keep it confidential? measurement
- What identity disclosure has the person consented to, and what limits or uncertainties have been explained? action
Indirect identification
Assess whether content or communication context could expose the person or others.
Identifying details
Identify unnecessary details that reveal the source while preserving the concern's meaning.
- Could unique access, event timing, document metadata or communication records identify the person? boundary
- Which identifying details can be omitted or generalised before an authorised disclosure? action
Retaliation, protection and support Track adverse treatment, assess support needs and keep protection claims explicitly qualified.
Reporting may alter the person's circumstances, while protection eligibility requires a separate, contextual assessment.
Adverse treatment and safety
Capture feared or experienced consequences without assuming their cause.
Consequences and needs
Record relevant events, their alleged relationship to disclosure and the person's priorities for assistance.
- What adverse treatment or threats are reported, when did they occur, and what links them to the disclosure? provenance
- What immediate safety, livelihood, communication or wellbeing support does the person want? action
Protection assessment
Locate applicable advice and record the basis and limits of any protection determination.
Eligibility and advice
Treat eligibility as an assessed status tied to a framework and circumstances, not an automatic property of the role.
- Which jurisdiction, sector, relationship and disclosure circumstances require assessment for possible protection? boundary
- Who assessed eligibility, under which current framework, and what limitations or uncertainties remain? provenance
- What independent advice or support should be sought before the person's next consequential step? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- The intended sense is inferred to be the institutional reporting role; PHY.LIV describes the human bearer but does not adequately classify the role itself.
- The listed kinds overlap: an external whistleblower may also be anonymous.
- Regulatory names are recalled, not researched; current applicability, amendments, and protection requirements require jurisdiction-specific verification.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Internal whistleblower
- External whistleblower
- Anonymous whistleblower
- Public-disclosure whistleblower
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Standards and regulation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- ISO 37002, Whistleblowing management systems - Guidelines, issued by the International Organization for Standardization
- Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, adopted by the European Parliament and Council
- Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, enacted by the United Kingdom Parliament
- Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, enacted by the United States Congress
- Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Reporting corruption, fraud, or misuse of institutional resources
- Alerting employers or regulators to safety hazards
- Exposing concealment of environmental harm
- Reporting abuse or serious misconduct within institutions
- Providing information that supports investigations and corrective action
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Retaliation, including dismissal, demotion, harassment, or exclusion
- Accidental identification through report details or failures of confidentiality
- Reports being suppressed, inadequately investigated, or routed to implicated people
- Disclosure of sensitive information creating privacy, security, or legal risks
- Psychological distress, financial loss, and professional isolation
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Legal definitions and protection differ by jurisdiction, employment status, sector, and subject matter.
- Requirements for protected internal reporting, external reporting, and public disclosure vary.
- Financial rewards and access to compensation or reinstatement vary across reporting regimes.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Informant - An informant supplies information to an investigator or authority; the information need not concern institutional wrongdoing encountered through the informant's work or institutional relationship.
- Leaker - A leaker discloses restricted information without authorization; the disclosure need not identify wrongdoing, while whistleblowing can use authorized reporting channels.
- Complainant - A complainant raises a grievance or allegation; a purely personal grievance does not necessarily constitute whistleblowing.
- Witness - A witness has relevant knowledge or gives evidence, but need not initiate a report or disclosure of wrongdoing.
- Whistleblowing - Whistleblowing is the reporting or disclosure activity; a whistleblower is the person performing it.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of whistleblower this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Does the registry intend whistleblower to include prospective reporters, unsuccessful reporting attempts and people mistakenly perceived as sources?
- How broadly should the descriptive role cover people whose knowledge comes from outside employment or another organisational relationship?
- Which existing Vercy models should own the person, disclosure event, allegation and investigation so this role model avoids duplication?
- Which jurisdictional and sector-specific sources are needed to assess protection, confidentiality limits and reporting requirements?
- What minimum record can support follow-up without creating an unnecessary identification risk for the whistleblower or other people?