South Africa is moving to strengthen protection for whistleblowers as OUTA launches a campaign documenting the human cost when that protection fails.
At the same time, one of the country’s most prominent state capture whistleblowers is again at the centre of a fight over the consequences of speaking out.
Athol Williams became one of South Africa’s best-known state-capture whistleblowers after providing the State Capture Commission of Inquiry with a roughly 700-page affidavit backed by nearly 500 documents, testifying about Bain & Company’s role at the South African Revenue Service.
The Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa, which provided Williams with legal support, says he lost friends, his career and income after coming forward, while his disclosures took a toll on his health and family. He ultimately left South Africa after testifying because he feared for his safety.
Now, as South Africa debates legislation intended to provide whistleblowers with better protection, the National Writers Association of South Africa has stepped into a new controversy involving Williams, warning about potential damage to his reputation, livelihood and professional standing.
NWASA, of which Williams is a member, has raised concerns about the potential consequences of a Daily Maverick investigation into allegations concerning his past.
The organisation has not asked that Williams be shielded from scrutiny. Rather, it argues that allegations must be distinguished from established fact and that Williams should be afforded a meaningful opportunity to respond, warning of potentially irreversible damage to his reputation and professional standing.
The legislation
Cabinet in March approved the publication of the draft Protected Disclosures Bill for public comment. The Bill is part of legislative reforms aimed at strengthening protection for whistleblowers through amendments to the existing Protected Disclosures Act, and responds to recommendations from the State Capture Commission Report, which called for better protection of policymakers and whistleblowers.
The Bill proposes to criminalise retaliation and provide psychosocial, legal and financial support to whistleblowers. It will broaden the definition of “whistleblower” to include contractors, consultants and members of the public and will establish clear procedures for confidential disclosures.
These developments converge on the question OUTA says the proposed Bill still does not adequately answer: what happens to whistleblowers before the system eventually comes to their aid?
“The Bill is a welcome acknowledgement that South Africa’s current whistleblower protection system is not good enough, but changing the law will mean very little if protection still arrives too late,” said OUTA executive director for accountability and public governance Advocate Stefanie Fick.
“Whistleblowers should not first have to lose their jobs, their income or their safety before the system responds,” Fick added.
They have names
OUTA wants protection to begin when a credible threat emerges, rather than after a whistleblower has already lost their livelihood or safety. It is calling for an independent Whistleblower Protection and Integrity Authority with the ability to provide rapid protection, as well as relocation assistance, temporary income support and physical and digital security for those at high risk.
OUTA’s new #TheyHaveNames campaign documents people who were threatened, attacked or killed in connection with exposing or confronting corruption, and the families left behind. They include Babita Deokaran, Martha Mani Rantsofu, Mpho Mafole, Armand Swart, Sindiso Magaqa and Marius van der Merwe.
“They were never just whistleblowers or names in a corruption story. They were mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, brothers, sisters, husbands and wives. They had families, ambitions and futures,” said OUTA supporter engagement manager Ibanathi Ngcobo.
