WHISTLEBLOWING VS. DEFAMATION
[The Preliminary]
In the data-base epoch, comes with enormous advantages, and equally, in that same measure, has presented a consequence, which strikes with ignorance and understanding, of the strings that binds the ‘Right’ and ‘Responsibility’, as well the ‘Task’ and ‘Duty of Care’ in contemporary society.
[Whistle-blow]
The action of a whistle blower, is a deliberate and meticulous steps, taken by a person in spirit of good fate, to reveal information from private Institution or public organization, established to be, illegal, immoral, illicit, unsafe, unethical, or fraudulent. In furtherance, the action of unveiling the secret acts, should follow the due process, by furnishing the discovered information to the ‘Rightful’ stakeholders, who have the ‘Legitimate’ authority, to respond technically on the discovered information, for the Interest of common good. While the ‘Blower’ anonymity and security, is safeguarded in surety; and the ‘Culprit’, is apprehended under a due process of the Rule of law, to satisfy the moral conditions of the law, in both side of the equation demands.
[Defamation]
On the other hand, defamation is an act of unveiling information, with conscious intentions, or politically calculated efforts, in pursuit of propaganda, to injure a third party’s reputation, which invoke a legally redressable injury.
And due to the objective agenda of defamation act, the communication channels, depends mostly on recipient audience, subtle to manipulation, and appeal to the persuasive context, of the delivered information.
Defamation law, in response to the defamation act, has a long history, dating back to classical antiquity, with ‘libel’ and ‘slander’, being legal subcategory of defamation act, thou, gave birth to, it doctrine of common law, in the late 18th century of England, which led to the Act of 1881 French defamation law, the Slander of women Act 1891 of England, and the charge against, defamation of a Public figure, U.S. Supreme Court decision on the 1964 case, New York Time Co. Vs. Sullivan.
REFERENCE TO FURTHER SOURCES
I. Johnson, R. A., Whistleblowing; when it works and why. Lynne Rienner Publishers. 2022, ISBN:978-1-58826-139-7.
II. Salmon, W. J., The law of Torts: A treatise on the English law of Liability for Civil Injuries. Stevens & Haynes Publishers. 1907, p.385.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photo, is the Courtroom of International Court of Justice © ICJ Archival Library
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA, Ph.D., SJD.
Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology, fellow, University of Sierra Leone. Fulbright Research Fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, USA.

Comments