JYU’s reporting channel pursuant to the Whistleblower Protection Act (whistleblowing)
What is the JYU whistleblowing channel?
If our employee or a person working with the University encounters illegal activity at work or suspects a violation, we want to know about it.
In the first instance, we encourage employees to discuss the matter with their supervisor or to contact the University Management, the Legal Services or the other parties mentioned in the University’s Code of Conduct. If this is not possible, you can report violations via the whistleblowing channel. More specific requirements for reporting an issue can be found below.
The whistleblowing channel has been established in accordance with the ) (In Finnish).
Who can report an issue?
Reporting can be done by a person falling within the definition of Section 5 of the Whistleblower Protection Act, who at work has encountered a suspected violation of legislation related to the activities of the Ä¢¹½Ö±²¥.
The scope includes, for example, JYU’s staff, subcontractors and partners, members of different bodies and, in accordance with the University’s own policy, also grant researchers. Students are not covered by the Whistleblower Protection Act unless they are simultaneously in an employment relationship or doing an internship at the University.
Can reporting be done anonymously?
We recommend that you report the issue under your own name. In this case, we are able to investigate the situation and its validity better. The Ä¢¹½Ö±²¥ does not commit to processing anonymous applications.
How is does reporting take place in practice?
The issue is reported in writing via the
In the notification channel, you will be given a random login and password, which will enable you to continue the conversation with the report handler anonymously and securely if you wish.
A report may be submitted without concrete evidence or full certainty as to whether an infringement has occurred. However, it is prohibited to intentionally report incorrect information.
The report will be acknowledged as received within seven days. In addition, the whistleblower will be informed, within three months of receipt of the notification, of the measures taken on the basis of the notification.
Please see detailed instructions.
What matters can be reported?
Via the channel, you can report violations of legislation within the scope of the Whistleblower Protection Act.
You can report other topics mentioned in section 2, subsection 3 of the Whistleblower Protection Act (EU financial management, grants, state subsidies, competition rules, taxation) for example, in the financial services or public procurement categories.
Who handles the reports and how does the handling process move forward?
When submitting a report, you select the area of legislation to which the report is linked to. This selection determines who processes the report. Report handlers by sub-areas are as follows:
| Report category | Handler |
|---|---|
| Public procurement | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Finance services, products and markets | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Prevention of money laundering and funding of terrorism | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Product safety and meeting the standards | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Traffic safety | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Environmental protection | Ulla Helimo, Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Radiation and nuclear safety | Kari Peräjärvi, Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Food and forage safety as well as health and wellbeing of animals | Maarit Lehti, Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Public health | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Consumer protection | Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
| Privacy and personal data protection as well as online and data system security | Teijo Roine, Riikka Valkonen, Visa Hiltunen and Anu Ikävalko |
The report handlers ensure that the report falls within the scope of the law and obtain the necessary additional information. After this, the report handlers estimate what measures are needed for solving the matter. If necessary, the report handlers will draw up a statement of objectivity to the competent person, which is determined by the nature and extent of the case. A competent person can be, for example, the head of a department, dean, the director of a University Services division, or the Rector. The competent person will appoint the persons checking the validity of the report where appropriate.
The scope and total duration of the investigation may vary depending on the nature, content or information contained in the report. Simple and detailed information is easier to investigate than complex cases or reports with incomplete information. If an investigation into a report leads to suspicion of a crime, we forward the information on the report to the authorities and other parties, or individuals involved in the preliminary investigation and to whom the information is required to be disclosed in accordance with the law.
How is the whistleblower protected?
The whistleblowing channel is designed to protect the identity of the whistleblower in all whistleblowing situations and the whistleblower is protected by the confidentiality obligations of the Whistleblower Protection Act. The disclosure of the identity of the whistleblower is permitted only in situations specifically provided for by law in connection with the examination of the report.
The persons that the report concerns are not allowed under any circumstances to participate in the processing of the report or in the decision-making concerning the follow-up measures, regardless of their role.
The whistleblower is not to be subject to any countermeasures or negative consequences for reporting the violation.
Centralised external reporting channel
In addition to the internal reporting channels of JYU and the those of other organisations, whistleblower protection agencies have established a centralised external reporting channel maintained by the Chancellor of Justice. It may be used in situations where no action has been taken on the basis of an internal report, the infringement cannot be effectively addressed on the basis of an internal report or where the person reporting the incident has reason to believe that they are at risk of being subject to countermeasures due to reporting the issue via the internal reporting channel.
