Every act of whistleblowing begins with a choice. A choice to stay silent or a choice to speak up. That decision rests on whether employees believe their organisation will protect them and not punish them.
Effective reporting systems are more than governance tools; they are expressions of integrity. When they are credible, people trust them, and accountability flourishes. When they are not, silence becomes the only safe option and wrongdoing, unfortunately, becomes embedded in the culture.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) has consistently found that most cases of fraud are uncovered through tips rather than audits (2024 ACFE Report to the Nations). Such disclosures only occur when people believe their information will be taken seriously and that they will be protected from retaliation. Yet in many workplaces, fear of isolation, victimisation, or potential job loss keeps people quiet.
Unfortunately, in SA this fear is founded. Over the past two decades, several whistleblowers who exposed corruption or unethical conduct have been threatened, and even killed. Their stories illustrate the real danger of speaking up, and highlight the urgent need for credible reporting systems and leadership that values the truth.
One of the most tragic examples is Babita Deokaran, a senior official in the Gauteng Department of Health who uncovered irregular procurement at Tembisa Hospital. In August 2021, she was shot and killed outside her Johannesburg home. Investigations revealed that her murder was probably linked to her efforts to expose fraudulent payments, turning her into a symbol of the dangers faced by those who speak up in the public interest.
Assassinated
In 2009, Jimmy Mohlala, the Speaker of the Mbombela Local Municipality, was assassinated after exposing corruption linked to tenders for the 2010 Fifa World Cup stadium project. His death remains unresolved, highlighting the lack of justice for whistleblowers in municipal structures. Around the same time, Moss Phakoe, a Rustenburg councillor, was gunned down two days after submitting evidence of municipal corruption to the minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.
In the private sector, Athol Williams, an academic and former consultant, testified before the Zondo Commission on State Capture and on Bain & Company’s work with the South African Revenue Service (SARS). Following threats and the absence of protection, he fled the country in 2021, saying he feared for his life.
More recently, Pamela Mabini, a community activist from Gqeberha, was murdered outside her home in March 2025 after exposing the human trafficking and organised crime networks in which televangelist Pastor Timothy Omotsoso was involved. Her death again raises questions about the safety of those who act in the public interest, emphasising once more that a whistleblowing mechanism that protects its users is not a mere governance tool; it is a safeguard for democracy and human life.
This pattern is not unique to SA. At Wells Fargo, employees who reported unethical sales practices were ignored or punished, even though their warnings were accurate. Millions of unauthorised accounts were opened to meet sales targets, and the cost to its reputation and public trust was immense.
Dismissed as dishonest
In the United Kingdom’s Post Office Horizon scandal, sub-postmasters who reported software errors were dismissed as dishonest and, in many cases, wrongfully prosecuted. A later inquiry confirmed that the absence of an effective reporting process allowed injustice to grow unchecked. These examples show that even respected institutions can fail when systems lack credibility and independence.
By contrast, effective systems demonstrate that whistleblowing protects, rather than threatens, an organisation. When reports are managed properly, investigated fairly, and supported by the Protected Disclosures Act, Act 5 of 2017, they strengthen rather than damage an organisation’s reputation.
In the US, for example, whistleblowers protected under the False Claims Act have helped recover more than $13-billion in fraud cases since the 1980s. The business case is clear; credible reporting mechanisms save both money and trust.
The British charity Protect estimated that ignoring whistleblowers in just three major UK scandals, including Carillion and the Post Office, cost taxpayers more than £400-million. One cannot help but wonder whether early intervention through trusted channels could have prevented much of that loss. Silence, as history keeps proving, is expensive.
Unfortunately, too many organisations still treat whistleblowing as a compliance exercise. They launch a hotline, publish a policy and then consider the job to be done. But accountability is cultural, not procedural. No tool will work if leadership punishes or ignores honesty. For these systems to succeed, leaders must listen, act and communicate clearly about what happens after employees’ concerns are raised.
True accountability
When employees see that integrity leads to results, trust grows naturally. No policy can replace that. True accountability is demonstrated in what follows. It is reflected in whether reports are investigated properly, feedback is provided to whistleblowers, corrective action is taken, and retaliation is prevented. These are the measures that determine whether a system builds trust or slowly destroys it. It takes courage to report wrongdoing, and equal courage to confront it. When both are present, resilience replaces fear.
The lesson is clear: truth will surface eventually. Organisations can choose whether it emerges through trusted reporting channels or public exposure. Those that make reporting safe choose the first path. Those that do not inevitably face the second.
A functioning whistleblowing mechanism is a mark of institutional strength. It shows that people care enough to warn the organisation before harm is done. In an era in which public trust in institutions is fragile, creating space for honesty is not about compliance or image; it is about survival. DM
Dantia Richards is the Governance and Communications Executive at The Ethics Institute.