No, such an employee is not protected because I don't think he's acting in the public interest. When the judge weighs up the public interest together with the principle of freedom of information, this kind of individual certainly won't be protected. And I certainly don't want to protect this kind of individual. Rather, I'm talking about, for example, one of the most recent and spectacular cases that we've ever seen, and that is the two Enron accountants who confided in journalists and explained the massive fraud that was under way. Their identity could not be revealed until the Enron people were charged and the accountants were given assurances as to their safety.They are the kind of individuals that we seek to protect. There will be many such individuals in our modern-day society, in relation to the environment, for example. Individuals will testify as to company practices; companies that deliberately come up with tricks to get around environmental legislation. Individuals will go to a journalist and the journalist will investigate. Then the journalist will blow the whistle on the companies once information has been gathered. But I do not think that it is in the public interest to simply report an illegal act to a journalist and expect that he will be entirely responsible for making it public. I don't think the judge would think so either.
On March 5th, 2008. See this statement in context.