If I blow whistle on the corrupt, will you protect my identity?

What you need to know:

  • If you speak to a journalist in confidence, he is under a moral and professional obligation not to reveal your name.

  • It’s a journalistic principle, and privilege, recognised the world over.

  • In democratic societies, protection of confidential sources is part of the fundamental rights and freedoms, including the freedom of expression.

With the flurry of stories on corruption the Nation has been publishing, several readers have wondered whether it’s safe to blow the whistle on the corrupt.

One said he had “delicate information” and wished to remain anonymous because the people involved have “strong connections”. He wrote to ask: “Can NMG guarantee that my identity will be protected?”

Another was mad that NMG had published some information even after “I told you guys not to!” She shouted in her email: “You can't be serious!!! I TOLD you guys not to publish some of my INFORMATIONs (sic) but you went ahead and did it!! How disrespectful!! You have caused (cost?) me my relationship. Hope you are cool with that!!”

EMOTIONS

However, when the op-ed editor, who was copied in, wrote back seeking more information, she didn’t respond to the email.

Yet another reader accused NMG of “disrespecting” someone’s life. “When someone retrieves information for your guys kindly RESPECT THAT!!! Today you guys have destroyed some serious relationships!!!!”

For the last two readers, I was unable to get to the bottom of their complaints since they did not to say exactly what happened.

I could not help, however, noticing their use of ALL CAPS and multiple exclamation marks. That kind of writing may not be acceptable in formal communication. But I understood their anger and surprise. These are emotions that are difficult to project into written text.

OBLIGATION

With that little matter of style out of the way, let me say there is nothing clearer in the profession of journalism than confidentiality of sources. If you speak to a journalist in confidence, he is under a moral and professional obligation not to reveal your name. It’s a journalistic principle, and privilege, recognised the world over.

There are good reasons for that. First, it’s a word of honour. Second, professional ethics require journalists to minimise harm. Third, it’s a practical matter: If confidential sources are not protected, that could give rise to a chilling effect in the ability of journalists to gather information.

Journalists would then soon find there is nobody willing to talk to them in confidence. And if that happens, then the ability of the media to uncover corruption, for example, would be severely compromised.

Fourth, in democratic societies, protection of confidential sources is part of the fundamental rights and freedoms, including the freedom of expression. In many of those countries, there are specific “shield laws” that protect the journalists’ right to protect confidential sources.

PROFESSIONALP

They recognise that if confidentiality of sources is not respected as a matter of principle, free flow of information would be inhibited, hurting the public interest.

In Kenya, confidentiality of sources is protected by the Second Schedule of the Media Council Act 2013, which states that journalists have “a professional obligation to protect confidential sources of information”.

And the NMG editorial policy states that, in circumstances where complete confidentiality is assumed as a condition of obtaining the story, then that situation needs to be respected and considered according to the existing legal framework.

“In general, journalists have a moral obligation to protect confidential sources of information,” the policy states.

DEFAMATION

However, in nearly all countries, there are instances when a journalist could be compelled to divulge confidential sources due to other, overriding interests. In Kenya, Article 52 of the Constitution states that every citizen has the right of access to information held by another person if they require it “for the exercise or protection of any right or fundamental freedom”.

That means a journalist can be compelled to divulge a confidential source if somebody sues and convinces the court that he requires the information, for example, to defend himself in a defamation case. Still, that would be rare and the threshold for convincing the court would probably be high.

So, relax; if you have any sensitive information the public should know that you want to disclose in confidence to an NMG journalist, you are in safe hands.

Send your complaints to [email protected]. Call or text 0721 989 264