Whistleblower protection
The third area of responsibility of the Ethics Officer relates to the protection of officials who believe that action has been taken against them because they have reported misconduct or cooperated with an audit or investigation (what is called whistleblower protection). This protection aims to reinforce the possibility for all officials to report cases where ethical standards have been disregarded without fear of retaliation.
The Ethics Office, however, does not replace any existing mechanisms available to staff for the reporting of misconduct or the resolution of grievances. A number of those mechanisms are listed in the Office Directive on ethics in the Office, paragraphs 17 to 20. This means that the Ethics Officer does not serve as a mechanism for reporting misconduct.
As described in the Office Procedure on "Ethics in the Office: Whistleblower protection", (IGDS N° 186) the Ethics Officer is called upon to make a preliminary review of complaints by staff who allege retaliation subsequent to their reporting misconduct or cooperating with an audit or investigation.
This preliminary review may ultimately lead to the referral of the matter to HRD for consideration of possible disciplinary action. Such a referral by the Ethics Officer would be a "qualified" referral, thus carrying some additional influence.
In a potential whistleblower protection situation, there is the need to protect not only the staff member alleging retaliation but also the rights of the accused official, ensuring the fairness and transparency of the whole procedure. It is especially important in such a sensitive situation to strictly follow the rules of natural justice and due process.
The Ethics Office, however, does not replace any existing mechanisms available to staff for the reporting of misconduct or the resolution of grievances. A number of those mechanisms are listed in the Office Directive on ethics in the Office, paragraphs 17 to 20. This means that the Ethics Officer does not serve as a mechanism for reporting misconduct.
As described in the Office Procedure on "Ethics in the Office: Whistleblower protection", (IGDS N° 186) the Ethics Officer is called upon to make a preliminary review of complaints by staff who allege retaliation subsequent to their reporting misconduct or cooperating with an audit or investigation.
This preliminary review may ultimately lead to the referral of the matter to HRD for consideration of possible disciplinary action. Such a referral by the Ethics Officer would be a "qualified" referral, thus carrying some additional influence.
In a potential whistleblower protection situation, there is the need to protect not only the staff member alleging retaliation but also the rights of the accused official, ensuring the fairness and transparency of the whole procedure. It is especially important in such a sensitive situation to strictly follow the rules of natural justice and due process.
Reliable and regularly updated financial and results data are an essential component of informing, monitoring, reporting and evaluating progress towards achieving decent work for all and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As a results-driven organization, the ILO uses open data to share progress on performance with its constituents, partners and the broader public. The ILO sees transparency as part of the larger process of informed governance and organizational learning. Transparency makes the ILO a reliable partner and ensures its accountability.
Based on a multi-phase action plan, the ILO is also looking at how it can improve its own systems and address any gaps in its current capacity to collect, manage and publish financial and results data.
The ILO is committed to preventing fraudulent and other proscribed practices and to actively promote an anti-fraud culture among officials, external collaborators, grantees, implementing partners and vendors. The ILO has zero tolerance to proscribed practices. The Office processes for reporting different kinds of proscribed practices and the subsequent investigation, review/recommendation, decision and sanction (where applicable) are shown in the flow chart below:
The ILO's efforts for continuous improvement build on a long-standing history of openness, transparency and accountability in all ILO operations, including:
Improving transparency means:
- establishing an evidence-base for the results achieved;
- providing insights on how, where and for what the ILO uses its resources;
- ensuring value for money;
- enhancing coordination between recipients and contributors to ILO support and increasing coherence in the multilateral system;
- putting in practice internationally recognized principles for effective development cooperation.
Based on a multi-phase action plan, the ILO is also looking at how it can improve its own systems and address any gaps in its current capacity to collect, manage and publish financial and results data.
The ILO is committed to preventing fraudulent and other proscribed practices and to actively promote an anti-fraud culture among officials, external collaborators, grantees, implementing partners and vendors. The ILO has zero tolerance to proscribed practices. The Office processes for reporting different kinds of proscribed practices and the subsequent investigation, review/recommendation, decision and sanction (where applicable) are shown in the flow chart below:
The ILO's efforts for continuous improvement build on a long-standing history of openness, transparency and accountability in all ILO operations, including:
- enhancing and developing external and internal dashboards designed to enhance transparency and accountability as well as provide an integrated overview of activities. These include public platforms on Development Cooperation, i-eval Discovery and Decent Work Results as well as internal tools to enable managers to make data-driven decisions.
- regular and public reporting to the Governing Body on results and the use of resources through the biennial Programme and Budget and the Programme Implementation Report;
- a prominent role for evaluation – managed by the ILO Evaluation Office (EVAL) in alignment with the ILO Evaluation Policy and Strategy – as an accountability and organizational learning tool to help ILO constituents and staff members support decent work and social justice;
- a Public Information Disclosure Policy to ensure that information on ILO policies, strategies and operational activities is available to the widest possible audience;
- an Office of Internal Audit and Oversight (IAO) that evaluates the ILO’s risk management, internal control, and governance processes, providing independent assurance to the Director-General and the Governing Body that those processes are in place and effective, as well insight and advice for improvements where needed. The IAO’s mandate also includes conducting fact finding investigations in support of the ILO’s zero tolerance with respect to fraud and corruption; and responding to allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse;
- a Committee on Accountability and a Vendor Review Committee, that review cases of alleged fraudulent and other proscribed practices involving ILO officials/ex-officials or external vendors, and make appropriate recommendations to the Director-General or the Treasurer and Financial Comptroller for the disciplinary actions or sanctions.
- an Independent Oversight Advisory Committee that reviews and monitors governance, accountability and ethical issues, reporting on them to the Governing Body;
- an Ethics Officer tasked with fostering a culture of integrity and high ethical standards;
- adherence to International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS); and
- collaborating with the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit, the independent external oversight body of the UN system.