The Whistleblower Act, 2006 (Act 720) represents a significant legislative effort by Ghana to promote transparency, accountability, and integrity in both public and private institutions. The Act provides a legal framework that encourages individuals to disclose information on unlawful or unethical conduct while offering protection against victimization. This article examines the key provisions of the Act, the conditions for protected disclosures, institutional mechanisms, and recent judicial interpretation.
What actions can be disclosed by a Whistleblower?
At the core of Act 720 is the concept of “impropriety.” Section 1 of the Act permits a person to make a disclosure where there is reasonable cause to believe that an impropriety has occurred, is occurring, or is likely to occur.
Impropriety is broadly defined to include:
- Economic crimes;
- Breach of legal obligations;
- Miscarriage of justice;
- Mismanagement or misuse of public resources;
- Environmental degradation; and
- Threats to public health or safety.
This wide scope ensures that the Act captures a broad spectrum of wrongdoing, making it a powerful tool for combating corruption and institutional abuse.
What conditions must be met for the Disclosure to be protected by the Act?
For a whistleblower to benefit from statutory protection, certain conditions must be met:
- The Good Faith Requirement: The whistleblower must reasonably believe that the information disclosed is substantially true and the disclosure must be made in good faith.
- The Proper Channels: The disclosure must be made to designated persons or institutions specified under Section 3.
The Act outlines multiple reporting channels, including employers, police officers, the Attorney-General, the Auditor-General, Members of Parliament, and institutions such as the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), among others. This multiplicity of channels enhances accessibility and increases the likelihood of effective reporting.
How can a Whistleblower make this disclosure?
Section 4 of the Act provides that disclosures may be made either orally or in writing. However, the Act encourages detailed reporting, which must include:
- The identity and contact details of the whistleblower;
- The nature of the impropriety;
- The identity of the alleged wrongdoer;
- Time and place of occurrence; and
- Details of any witnesses.
These procedural requirements ensure that disclosures are credible and capable of proper investigation.
Is the Whistleblower protected?
A central pillar of Act 720 is the protection of whistleblowers from victimization. The Act prohibits any form of retaliation against the Whistleblower which includes:
- Dismissal or suspension;
- Denial of promotion;
- Harassment or intimidation;
- Forced transfers; and
- Any discriminatory treatment.
Importantly, protection extends beyond employees to include any individual who suffers adverse treatment as a result of making a disclosure.
However, the Act recognises that not all adverse actions constitute victimization. Where an employer can demonstrate that the action taken is lawful and unrelated to the disclosure, liability may not arise.
What happens when the Whistleblower is victimized?
A whistleblower who experiences victimization may lodge a complaint with CHRAJ as stated in Section 13 of the Act. The Commission is empowered to investigate and make binding orders, including:
- Reinstatement
- Reversal of transfers, and
- Payment of compensation or rewards.
These orders are enforceable as judgments of the High Court, underscoring their legal weight.
Additionally, under Section 15, a whistleblower may bring an action in the High Court for damages, provided that the complaint has first been submitted to CHRAJ.
The Act further safeguards whistleblowers and their families by offering police protection where there is a threat to their lives or properties.
In addition to this, whistleblowers are granted immunity by being shielded from civil and criminal liability in relation to the disclosure unless the disclosure is proven to be knowingly false and made with malicious intent.
These provisions are crucial in encouraging disclosures, particularly in high-risk cases.
What is the Whistleblower Reward Fund?
The Act establishes a Whistleblower Reward Fund meant to incentivize disclosures. Under Section 23, a whistleblower may receive a monetary reward where disclosure leads to a conviction, although the specific sum or percentage is not stated.
However, where the disclosure leads to the recovery of a sum of money, the Whistleblower is entitled to 10% of the recovered sum or a figure as determined by the Attorney-General, in consultation with the Inspector-General of Police.
What do the Courts say?
The recent case of Ramasamy v. Attorney-General, GRA & EOCO (2026) provides critical judicial guidance on the application of the Act.
In this case, the plaintiff disclosed the fact that Melcom Gh was engaged in tax evasion, which led to significant financial recoveries by the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA), including a penalty in the sum of 7.9 million Ghana Cedis. GRA gave this penalty to EOCO, out of which the Plaintiff’s 10% was paid. EOCO kept the remainder due to the expenses it had incurred during the investigation. Subsequent audits were conducted by GRA on Melcom which led to the recovery of additional sums of money. The Plaintiff was denied a further reward following the subsequent audits, which caused him to institute the action.
The court held that there was indeed a causal link between the initial disclosure and the subsequent recoveries, although this was denied by the GRA, and as the recoveries stemmed from the Plaintiff’s disclosure, he was therefore entitled to an additional 10% reward.
Additionally, the Court decided that funds meant for whistleblower rewards should be paid into the Whistleblower Fund and not diverted to other agencies
This decision reinforces the principle that whistleblowers are entitled to full benefits where their disclosures lead to continued or extended financial recovery.
Conclusion
The Whistleblower Act, 2006 (Act 720) remains a vital instrument in Ghana’s legal framework for promoting accountability and combating corruption. Its comprehensive provisions on disclosure, protection, and rewards demonstrate a strong commitment to safeguarding individuals who act in the public interest.
However, effective implementation remains key. Judicial decisions such as Ramasamy highlight the need for strict adherence to statutory provisions, particularly in relation to the administration of the Whistleblower Reward Fund.
Ultimately, strengthening institutional compliance and public awareness will ensure that the Act achieves its full purpose as a tool for transparency and good governance.
By: Maria Mbroba Biney
