The International Labour Organization (ILO) just released its Working Paper 135 on "Protecting whistle-blowers in the public service" (only in English, for the time being), a robust and fascinating dive into how 67 countries handle whistleblower protection laws in the public sector. 

The paper maps out national laws across ILO Member States, analysing them against 14 indicators pulled from international frameworks, like UNODC, OECD, and Transparency International. 

A few takeaways: 

• Scope of protection: The paper shows a distinct diversity in how countries define the "scope" of whistleblower protection—basically, who’s covered, what they can report, and under what conditions. While standalone or dedicated laws signal a broader intent to protect whistleblowers, the "partial" or "limited" ones feel more like afterthoughts, narrowing who qualifies. 

• Who’s protected: most counties surveyed cast a wide net, covering not just career civil servants but also contractors, interns, even ex-employees – like Spain’s law, which explicitly includes self-employed, shareholders, and even relatives who might face retaliation. But a few keep it tight, potentially leaving gaps for non-traditional workers. 

• What can be reported: half the laws surveyed are comprehensive, letting whistleblowers report a wide variety of issues, such as corruption, safety risks, mismanagement – Belgium’s law even covers breaches of internal rules or threats to the environment.  While the other half stick to specific crimes and serious offences only. 

• Protection threshold: the laws in the majority of the countries surveyed are comprehensive, protecting anyone with a reasonable belief their report’s true – like Brazil where it’s about the report’s plausibility, not the whistleblower’s motives.  But others keep it very rigorous, affecting how safe people feel stepping up. 

While the ILO’s 2022 meeting on the protection of whistle-blowers in the public service sector (in which PSI had a leading role) recognized that some level of diversity between national laws is to be expected, the paper notes that this diversity clashes with the consistent recommendations from the OECD, UNODC, and TI, who push for wide coverage, low thresholds, and clear intent – only 5 laws hit "comprehensive" across all 14 indicators –  which “raises questions on the need for additional guidance or coordination” and strengthens PSI drive for a wider global framework.