Dear Philippe,

That is great news, thank you very much!

All the best,

René


From: DUPONTEIL Philippe (TRADE)
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:28 PM
To: SLOOTJES Rene (HR)
Cc: SANDLER Peter (TRADE); WILLIAMS Karen (HR); SCHIEBLE Christoph (HR); LOBILLO BORRERO Cristina (TRADE)
Subject: RE: ISC (ARES(2012) 227556) - Guidelines on whistleblowing - urgent

Dear René,

 

We discussed with Jean-Luc Demarty and based on your explanatory message, we agree to lift our negative opinion for the CIS. We will do that in CISNET tomorrow morning.

 

Best regards

 

Philippe 

 

 


From: SLOOTJES Rene (HR)
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 6:13 PM
To: DUPONTEIL Philippe (TRADE)
Cc: SANDLER Peter (TRADE); WILLIAMS Karen (HR); SCHIEBLE Christoph (HR)
Subject: ISC (ARES(2012) 227556) - Guidelines on whistleblowing - urgent
Importance: High

Dear Mr Duponteil,

With reference to DG TRADE's request for clarification in their reaction to the ISC, I can provide you with the following information.

First a general comment: as said over the phone, I confirm that assigning the guidance function to the ethics correspondents was at the explicit wish of Catherine Day, expressed in a preparatory meeting with the services most directly concerned (SG, LS, OLAF). This means that a change of the guidelines on this point, for example by assigning this role to a central service, will be met with a negative opinion from the SG.

Secondly, to answer your specific questions:

1) (added value in installing an extra procedural layer?)

Using the guidance function offered by the guidelines is not mandatory. It is merely a possibility that adds to other possible points of contact. The guidelines say in this respect that "Naturally, this guidance function is without prejudice to the possibility of staff members to consult their line manager, or a specialised service" (listed in footnote). In addition, there is the possibility to 'test' the concern with OLAF via the Fraud Notification System, also mentioned in the guidelines. The ethics correspondents have a strictly advisory function on staff-related ethics matters and are not a 'reporting channel' in the sense of Article 22a SR.

2) (appropriate seniority of the ethics correspondent?)

This is really for the DG concerned to determine. In many DGs, the function of ethics correspondent is exercised by the head of the HR unit.

The network of ethics correspondents is managed by DG HR.B.1 (ethics, rights and obligations), in cooperation with IDOC. Nothing prevents an ethics correspondent who is not at ease with a question to refer it to DG HR – indeed, this very often happens. At the last meeting of ethics correspondents, it was clearly said that in case of possible whistleblowing, they should not hesitate to contact HR.B.1 or IDOC.

Similarly, nothing obliges a senior staff member to address him/herself to the (junior) ethics correspondent in the DG concerned – there is the explicit possibility in the guidelines to consult IDOC, OLAF, HR.B.1 or SG.B.4 (public service ethics), amongst others.

3) (how to safeguard the ethics correspondent's impartiality vis-à-vis the own hierarchy?)

It should be noted in this respect that, according to the Ethics Communication of 2008, the ethics correspondents have a strictly advisory function and that, when dealing with queries

from staff the ethics correspondents act in confidence. It is in particular the latter element of confidentiality that safeguards the impartiality of the ethics correspondent vis-à-vis hierarchy. We have not had any complaints, since 2008, about a lack of impartiality of an ethics correspondent, although they are frequently consulted.

We would be most grateful if DG TRADE could reconsider its position in light of the above, and I am at your disposal for further clarification if need be. Please note that the Commission is under considerable pressure from (in particular) the EP at this time of discharge and discussions on the staff regulations to come up with a policy initiative in this area, and has committed to doing so. Therefore, a response at your earliest convenience would be much appreciated.

Best regards,

René