FROM DISCLOSURE TO PROTECTION: A JURISPRUDENTIAL APPRAISAL OF PAKISTAN’S SHIFT IN WHISTLEBLOWER LEGISLATION

Abstract

This article examines Pakistan’s evolving journey in transparency and accountability by critically analyzing the shift from the Public Interest Disclosure Act, 2017 (PIDA), to the newly proposed Whistleblower Protection Act. Both laws are designed to promote integrity in governance. Yet, replacing PIDA without a structured review raises serious concerns about consistency in legislation, the strength of constitutional safeguards, and the resilience of Pakistan’s democratic framework.

Drawing on comparative experiences from jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union, the article highlights a clear contrast. In mature democracies, changes to whistleblower or disclosure laws are usually preceded by empirical studies, public consultations, and impact assessments. Pakistan’s approach, however, bypasses this essential diagnostic process. As a result, whistleblower protection risks being reduced to a symbolic act rather than a meaningful safeguard.

The discussion also underscores the broader implications for the constitutional right to information under Article 19-A. Repealing an existing law without evidence-based justification not only diverges from international best practices but also undermines the institutional framework of accountability.

The article ultimately argues that genuine progress requires recognising the right to know and whistleblower protection as complementary, not interchangeable. Instead of discarding existing legislation, Pakistan’s lawmakers should pursue a reformist approach that strengthens, rather than weakens, the architecture of democratic accountability.