Whistleblowing – A Guide to Compliance: Part 4
Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.14.21
Crowell & Moring LLP’s 2021 series of client alerts: Whistleblowing – A Guide to Compliance is intended to provide companies with a practical guide to help them comply with their obligations under the EU Whistleblower Directive. Via a monthly alert, Crowell & Moring LLP will explain the different steps that companies need to take for compliance and emphasize various points for consideration. Step #4: Check the steps you should already be taking to ensure your company’s compliance with the EU Whistleblower Directive and the national laws that implement it.
1. Summary of the different steps and action points that can already be undertaken for compliance with the EU Whistleblower Directive
In our previous Alerts in this series, we have drawn attention to some of the steps and action points that companies can already undertake with a view to compliance:
- Action point #1: Analyze the company’s obligation to establish internal reporting channels and procedures (see Whistleblowing – A Guide to Compliance: Part 1)
- Action point #2: Understand the importance of setting up an effective internal whistleblowing system and organize an Internal Survey or listening sessions that will give you an insight into how your company’s employees view your internal communications (see Whistleblowing – A Guide to Compliance: Part 2)
- Action point #3: Understand the obligations of companies with operations in various EU member states and start implementing internal reporting channels, based on the provisions of the EU Whistleblower Directive (see Whistleblowing – A Guide to Compliance: Part 3 and Part 3b)
2. Current status of the implementation of the EU Whistleblower Directive in the various EU member states
Conclusion:
From the overview set out above, it can be seen that although some major EU member states are already well advanced in the transposition of the EU Whistleblower Directive (the Netherlands, Sweden), most countries are lagging behind. As a result, there is a definite risk that these countries will not meet the deadline for transposition of the Directive of December 17, 2021. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether the deadline of December 17, 2021 is realistic and whether the European Commission might agree to an extension of this deadline.
- Action point #4: Monitor the different EU member states’ national implementation of the EU Whistleblower Directive to identify specific national requirements.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25

