According to the adopted amendments, the list of persons who may be granted protection under Art. 5 of the Act after a submitted whistleblowing report, has been limited. The provision granting protection to any whistleblower who reports an infringement of which he/she has knowledge in a work context has been repealed. Thus, the enumeration of the categories of whistleblowers who may receive protection under the Act, is now exhaustive.
It is foreseen that private sector employers with 50 to 249 employees are entitled to share resources for receiving and following up on whistleblowing reports, while complying with the requirements to protect confidentiality, provide feedback and take action against the breach for which the report has been submitted. This change could have significant implications for the implementation of the new regime at group level across multiple companies.
The competent whistleblowing authorities now have the power to apply corrective measures aimed at suspending retaliation by the employer until the conclusion of the whistleblowing investigation. For this purpose, a request shall be made to the relevant authority by the whistleblower. Where corrective measures are imposed, failure to comply by the person taking the retaliatory action would justify the imposition of an administrative penalty – a fine/pecuniary penalty in the range between BGN 1000 (approx. EUR 500) and BGN 4000 (approx. EUR 2000), unless a more severe penalty could be imposed.
The Act also entitles the whistleblower to address the court before which the proceedings have been initiated, requesting the suspension of any retaliatory action until the court’s judgement – the so-called ‘interim measures’. The court issues a ruling which is subject to appeal under the applicable procedure.
With the latest revisions, the Act specifies who shall bear the burden of proof in court proceedings as regards the connection between a whistleblowing report and the retaliatory action taken. Namely, it is envisaged that the person who took the retaliatory action (most often the employer) must prove that the latter was in no way related to the whistleblowing.
