• Legal

Working with the US Congress or UK Parliament

  • Written By: The Signals Network

If you believe a federal law may have been violated by your company’s practice, there may be reason to involve Congress. While members of congress can be some of your most powerful allies, working with them can be a confusing process with long delays and high stakes, so the information below is meant to provide insight if you are considering this route.

Keep in mind

Congressional offices can help highlight information to the press on your behalf and help push the story along through hearings and other actions.

You can bring information to Congress while simultaneously pursuing a reward through a regulator. Congress can also press regulators to keep your case moving forward and getting attention.

Since Congress creates the laws that federal agencies implement, forming a relationship with a Congressional office could help lead to regulatory changes, but this would be much further down the line.

If the company knows that you are working with Congress and have their backing, it can reduce the risk of strong retaliation against you.

Tips

The House of Representatives passed a rule in the 2021–22 Congress that they must protect the identity of whistleblowers. Congress may request a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation of companies that receive federal funds, the results of a federal agency’s implementation of an activity, or a federal agency’s handling of an whistleblower’s claims. The GAO provides authoritative accounts to lawmakers and will keep your identity protected.

The Senate has not passed a rule in the 2021–22 Congress that they must protect the identity of whistleblowers. If you work with an office that has a good reputation of working with whistleblowers they will still try to keep your identity a secret, but there is no guarantee.

Many congressional offices are overwhelmed and may not be the best first point of contact when revealing information because of the lack of official processes in place and the time commitment associated with making sense of new information.

Working with the UK Parliament

Parliamentary Privilege in the United Kingdom

  • The UK has a concept of “parliamentary privilege,” which states that Members of Parliament (MPs) can’t be sued (for example, for defamation) or prosecuted for anything they say in the Chamber, Westminster Hall or a committee of the House. This allows them to speak up on behalf of constituents, express an opinion, or condemn corruption, malpractice or even criminal activity without fear of legal action, as long as they do so in proceedings of the House. This protection extends to written proceedings: for example, written and oral questions, motions, early day motions, and amendments tabled to bills and motions.
  • Anyone [officially] giving evidence to a committee of the House also has this protection, which is a safeguard for witnesses and also ensures that select committees are not obstructed in their inquiries by threats of legal action, or any other kind of threat against witnesses.
  • A similar protection applies to any document published by order of the House, or under its authority. This includes select committee reports and written evidence, certain reports made under statutory authority and reports published in reply to a ‘motion for an unopposed return’.
  • The protection extends to Hansard (the Official Report), but if you circulate an extract from Hansard (for example, a speech) on its own, the protection may be more limited. The protection for published documents is provided by the Parliamentary Papers Act 1840.
  • Privilege doesn’t necessarily apply to the repetition outside Parliament of things said in proceedings.

Source: MPs’ Guide to Procedure

Considerations for working with MPs

  • It helps to have a supportive intermediary, like a civil society organization or a reporter when bringing your case to a MP.
  • It can often be easier to get in touch with a MP than with a US Member of Congress.
  • The US Congress will often pay attention to the issues raised by MPs and UK Parliamentary Committees when there is a US nexus.
  • MPs will care about any issue that affects UK citizens or users of a service who are based in the UK. This can include issues such as promoting harm to UK users, affecting UK user data/privacy, interfering with UK elections, business practices of tech companies in the UK, etc.
  • Bringing information to the UK Parliament can put pressure on tech companies through public statements, investigations, or MPs may bring the issues to the Information Commissioner’s Office who can regulate the companies.
  • The MP is under no statutory responsibility to keep a source’s identity anonymous. It is likely that you will need to reveal your identity to the office, but you can request that they keep it confidential.
  • Be intentional when picking an MP or a Parliamentary Committee to work with.

Checklist

  • When approaching Congress, it will help your information get more traction if you work with a lawyer first to identify which federal laws were possibly violated by the information you have and outline this in the initial information you provide.
  • When approaching Congress, do it through an experienced organization or NGO, like the Government Accountability Project, that can help you put your pitch together. 

“Congressional allies will be easier to find if your dissent is supported by a solid constituency base or promises opportunities for public visibility on an important political or public interest issue that matters to the voters” Devine & Maassarani, 2011, p. 115

“Find out not only if they have helped whistleblowers in the past but also if they followed up once the headlines faded. You can do this by researching their past work in back issues of newspapers, by talking with NGOs that have ongoing relationships with offices and staff, and by directly discussing those issues with the member’s staff person” Tom Devine & Tarek F. Maassarani, The Corporate Whistleblower’s Survival Guide: A Handbook for Committing the Truth (2011), p. 116

  • Keep initial disclosures brief and focused on the relevant point. 
  • Tell them where they can find more information and/or what else you can provide, but you don’t have to dump it all at once. 
  • The initial interaction is to get their interest and then you can build a relationship.
  • Position yourself as a concerned individual who can serve as a source of information.

RELEVANT LINKS

Disclaimer

The Signals Network does not request, encourage or counsel potential whistleblowers to act unlawfully. This section covers some key information to be aware of based on the experience of other whistleblowers who have been through this before and the people who helped them. This section doesn’t offer legal advice, and potential whistleblowers are encouraged to consult with counsel about their particular situation.

Statement of transparency

This entire project is worthless if the tech workers who come to it cannot trust where the information is from, who is behind its creation, and who manages the site. For that reason, I have identified every organization and individual who has been instrumental in its development.

The time and resources required to put together the Handbook were funded by Omidyar Network. This is a wholly independent project owned and managed by me. No identifying data will ever be collected or shared about who accesses this site — with anyone. That said, I do NOT advise accessing this from a company device. Your employer can, and will likely, track visits to a resource like this Handbook. 

You can find a list of the data WordPress automatically collects about site visits here.

 

— Ifeoma Ozoma, Founder of Earthseed, Creator of the Tech Worker Handbook