A/HRC/28/60 D. Protection of whistle-blowers and reporting persons 36. In its resolution 23/9, the Human Rights Council acknowledged the important role that civil society plays in exposing corruption and drawing attention to the negative impact of the non-repatriation of funds of illicit origin on the rule of law and the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. In that resolution the Council reiterated the obligation of States to protect reporting persons in accordance with article 33 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 37. Journalists, whistle-blowers, anti-corruption activists, investigating officers, judges, prosecutors, lawyers and human rights defenders exposing corruption have frequently been victims of reprisals or human rights violations, including death threats, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances and killings. Between 1 January 2010 and 31 November 2014, the special procedures of the Human Rights Council sent more than 35 urgent appeals and letters of allegation to 22 countries and territories covering such concerns.29 The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression recently stressed that journalists covering corruption, organized crime and drug trafficking were at particular risk (see A/HRC/20/17). According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, as of 31 December 2014 out of 725 journalists murdered since 1992 worldwide, 208 of them, or 29 per cent, had covered corruption issues.30 Reporters Without Borders reported in 2011 that at least 141 journalists covering organized crime or drug trafficking—another major source for illicit financial flows— were killed in the decade 2000–2010.31 38. While several jurisdictions have introduced new laws protecting witnesses, whistleblowers or persons reporting corruption, the protection of whistle-blowers and witnesses to corruption frequently falls short of international standards or best practices. The latest thematic report presented to the Implementation Review Group of the United Nations Convention against Corruption notes that there “was wide variation among the States parties with regard to the protection of witnesses, experts and victims”. While in several States the protections went beyond the minimal protection of non-disclosure of the identity or whereabouts of witnesses, the report noted that “in several States no measures had been taken for the effective protection of witnesses and experts”. The report furthermore underlines that “a number of States parties had not established comprehensive whistleblower protections, although legislation was pending in several cases. Common challenges related to specificities in national legal systems, limited capacity and the absence of specific regulations or systems for the protection of whistle-blowers” (CAC/COSP/IRG/2014/7, paras. 13–14). 39. Transparency International has highlighted the fact that many legal frameworks to protect whistle-blowers do not adequately ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of reporting persons or fail to cover whistleblowing within the private sector.32 Several countries have introduced notable new national legislation strengthening the protection of whistle-blowers in recent years: they include the Republic of Korea, South Africa, and 29 30 31 32 14 See the periodical communications reports of special procedures, A/HRC/28/85, A/HRC/27/72, A/HRC/26/21, A/HRC/25/74, A/HRC/24/21, A/HRC/23/51, A/HRC/22/67, A/HRC/21/49, A/HRC/20/30, A/HRC/19/44, A/HRC/18/51. Committee to Protect Journalists, data available from www.cpj.org/killed/murdered.php Reporters Without Borders, “Organized crime: Muscling in on the media” (Paris, 2011), Transparency International, “Whistleblower Protection and the UN Convention against Corruption” (Berlin, 2013).