The German Whistleblower Protection Act provides for the following reporting channels for whistleblowing:

• Mail
• Telephone (so-called whistleblower hotline)
• E-mail (encrypted)
• Encrypted digital whistleblower portal / whistleblower system
• Facilitating a face-to-face meeting at the whistleblower’s request within a reasonable timeframe

The German Whistleblower Protection Act does not provide for an obligation to receive anonymous reports. However, it is highly advisable to offer anonymous reporting channels, e.g. in a whistleblower portal, as whistleblowers might otherwise prefer external reporting ways where anonymous reporting is possible.

The German Whistleblower Protection Act does impose the following requirements on the internal reporting channel, which are difficult to fulfil without a system:

• Maintaining confidentiality regarding the identity of the whistleblower and any other parties involved (see § 8). However, the possibility of anonymous reporting is not mandatory.
• Compliance with documentation obligations including compliance with deletion deadlines (§ 11).
• Ensuring the possibility to report orally or in writing and to meet in person at the whistleblower’s request (§16(3)).
• Compliance with the deadlines for confirmation of receipt (§ 17 (1)) and re-registration (§ 17 (2)).
• Examination of the report with regard to the admissibility of the subject of the report and the validity of the allegations made, contact with the whistleblower and, if necessary, obtaining further information from the whistleblower (§ 17 (1)).
• Taking follow-up measures (§17(1) and § 18) and reporting back to the whistleblower on planned and already taken follow-up measures (§ 17(2)).

According to the German Whistleblower Protection Act, whistleblowers are in principle free to contact either the (external) central reporting channel at the Federal Office of Justice (Bundesamt für Justiz) or an internal reporting channel within the company.

Due to this equality of internal and external reporting channels, companies are well advised to establish an effective internal whistleblower reporting channel like a whistleblowing system. The advantage of internal reporting is obvious, because it cannot be in a company’s interest that actual or even alleged violations lead to government investigations and, in case of doubt, public attention.

Especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, outsourcing the internal whistleblower system to an external Ombudsperson is advantageous, as there is often a risk that the identity of the whistleblower may become known in companies with a smaller workforce. 

In addition, the internal reporting channel must be operated by an independent and competent person or department. Conflicts of interest must be avoided and the persons in charge of the task must be trained regularly.

When a Whistleblowing Ombudsperson is appointed, all these obligations are waived for the company (provided a suitably qualified provider has been chosen).