Abstract
<jats:p>The article is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the legal status of whistleblowers in the anti-corruption system in Ukraine and its compliance with international standards. The evolution and current state of the regulatory and legal framework for whistleblowers, as enshrined in the Council of Europe’s Criminal and Civil Conventions on Combating Corruption (1999), the UN Convention against Corruption (2003) and EU Directive 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. The national legislation of Ukraine is analysed in detail, in particular the Law ’On Prevention of Corruption’, which defines the status of whistleblowers, mechanisms for reporting through internal, external and public channels, as well as a system of protection guarantees, including confidentiality, anti-repressive measures, legal assistance and compensation mechanisms. The role of the National Agency for Corruption Prevention (NAZK) as the central body in the whistleblower protection system is considered. Particular attention is paid to a comparative analysis of European experience in whistleblower protection. The models of Estonia, with its high level of digitalisation of procedures, Lithuania, with its effective Special Investigation Service and damage compensation mechanisms, Latvia, with its extension of the scope of legislation to the private sector, Germany, with its enhanced labour protection guarantees under the HinSchG Act, and France, with its progressive Sapin II Act, which introduces the principle of staged reporting. Based on an analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the cases of Halet v. Luxembourg (2023) and Hrachya Harutyunyan v. Armenia (2020), key criteria for assessing the legality of whistleblowers’ disclosure of information have been identified. The strengths and weaknesses of the Ukrainian whistleblower protection system have been identified, and key challenges to the practical implementation of regulatory guarantees have been identified, including the insufficient effectiveness of anti-repressive mechanisms, limited possibilities for compensation for damage, low level of digitalisation, and weak coordination between state bodies. Specific areas for improving whistleblower protection mechanisms in Ukraine have been identified, including expanding digital capabilities for anonymous reporting, strengthening the institutional capacity of the NACP, improving compensation procedures, and raising public awareness and trust in anti-corruption tools. It has been proven that full compliance with European standards requires a transition from formal regulatory enshrinement to the creation of effective mechanisms for the practical implementation of whistleblower protection guarantees. Keywords: whistleblower, whistleblower protection, anti-corruption legislation, EU Directive 2019/1937, NACP, international standards, corruption, protection guarantees.</jats:p>