Analysis of dimensions and components of supporting whistleblowers in the Iranian and Egyptian criminal systems

Abstract

Differential criminal policy in supporting whistleblowers is an approach that Iran and Egypt have adopted, recognizing the need to differentiate between types of whistleblowing. Both countries offer different levels of legal protection based on criteria such as the quality of documents and evidence, the level of risk of the whistleblower, the type of corruption, and the motivations for reporting. Egypt, by enacting Law No. 38 of 2021, has established a relatively advanced framework, including reversing the burden of proof, establishing a specialized institution, and secure reporting mechanisms. Iran, relying on the Law on the Publication and Free Access to Information and other regulations, is also gradually moving towards establishing support mechanisms. Key commonalities between the two countries include paying attention to the documentation of reports, emphasizing disclosure motivated by public interest, and providing protection commensurate with the level of risk. However, there are also common challenges; including weakness in the practical implementation of legal provisions, the lack of fully independent institutions to handle reports, cultural resistance to whistleblowing, and lack of awareness among citizens and law enforcement. With this in mind, the issue of differential criminal policy of supporting corruption whistleblowers in the criminal systems of Iran and Egypt has been examined using an analytical-descriptive method and in a library format. The research findings show that the main difference is in the maturity of the legal system and the depth of protection. Egypt has taken greater steps with a special law and dedicated institutions, and as a result, Iran is still in the process of formulating and completing its legal frameworks. However, both countries need to strengthen independent supervisory institutions, provide sufficient resources, extensive training, and create a culture of trust in support mechanisms to effectively implement this policy.