A recent case in Australia shows how easily fear can frustrate an informant’

游客2024-03-12  14

问题     A recent case in Australia shows how easily fear can frustrate an informant’s good intentions. In December, a woman wrote anonymously to the country’s antitrust watchdog, the ACCC, alleging that her employer was colluding with others in breach of the Trade Practices Act. Her evidence was sufficient to suggest to the ACCC that fines of A$10m could be imposed on "a large company". But the agency needed more details. So just before Christmas it advertised extensively to try and persuade the woman to come forward again. Some days later her husband rang the ACCC, but he hung up before disclosing vital information. Now the agency is trying to contact the couple again.
    In America, there is some evidence that the events of September 11th have made people more public-spirited and more inclined to blow the whistle. The Government Accountability Project, a Washington-based group, received 27 reproaches from potential informants in the three months before September 11th, and 66 in the three months after. Many of these complaints were about security issues. They included a Federal Aviation Adnunistration employee who claimed that the agency had repeatedly failed to respond to known cases of security violations at airports.
    Legislation to give greater protection to people who expose corporate or government misbehavior externally(after having received no satisfaction internally)is being introduced in a number of countries. In America, it focuses on informants among federal employees. According to Billy Garde, a lawyer who was a member of BP’s Alaska inquiry team, they "have less rights than prisoners". A bill introduced last year by Senator Daniel Akaka to improve protection for them is currently stuck in congressional committees.
    In Britain, the Public Interest Disclosure Act came fully into force last year. Described by one American as "the most far-reaching informant protection in the world", it treats informants as witnesses acting in the public interest. This separates them from people who are merely pursuing a personal grievance. But even in Britain, the protection is limited. Rupert Walker, a fund manager, was fired by Govett Investments in September 2001 for expressing concerns in the Financial Times about a group of people of investment trusts that invest in each other. [br] According to the third paragraph, informants among the American federal employees ______.

选项 A、disclose misbehavior externally when they are disappointed internally
B、get more protection than people who disclose misbehavior externally
C、have less rights than prisoners
D、get as much protection as before

答案 D

解析 第3段末句表明虽然美国加强保护举报人的法案已经提出,但是未能在国会委员会通过,也就是说,对举报人的保护还是跟以前一样,因此选项D为正确的说法。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3528788.html
最新回复(0)