The free legal aid program for whistleblowers has proven to be useful, but there is still room for significant improvement, according to the evaluation of legal aid for whistleblowers.
Since early 2024, individuals reporting suspected misconduct have been able to receive free legal assistance and mediation following a referral from the Advisory Department of the House for Whistleblowers (House). The program was initially established for a period of four years. It was recently evaluated by the KWINK group.
At the same time, free psychosocial support is available; see our article on the evaluation of free psychosocial support for those who report incidents.
Evaluation
The primary purpose of the provision is to lower the barrier to reporting and to strengthen the legal protection of whistleblowers. According to researchers from the KWINK Group, the program was established following the 2020 evaluation of the Whistleblower Act (conducted by the KWINK Group). However, the EU Directive on the Protection of Whistleblowers also stipulates that whistleblowers must be supported through free (legal) advice, legal aid, psychological assistance, and financial support. In our view, this last aspect has, incidentally, been largely ignored by successive governments.
The subsidy program is primarily intended for whistleblowers, following a referral from the House’s Advisory Department. In this process, the advisor assesses, among other things, whether or not there is a potential wrongdoing and whether legal assistance or mediation is warranted. The individual then receives a so-called “referral letter.” This process is being used more and more frequently, although the numbers are not yet overwhelming. As of early 2026, the total stood at 27 matched requests; in these cases, a whistleblower was indeed able to receive free legal assistance from an attorney. Third parties involved and individuals assisting a whistleblower may also use this service. The report does not indicate whether this actually occurs.
The organization of legal aid and mediation is currently the responsibility of the Legal Aid Board (Raad voor Rechtsbijstand, here called the Board). The Board was designated for this purpose because it has experience with similar programs. The Board handles the matching process with affiliated attorneys and mediators. According to the KWINK Group, this system is largely functioning as intended. However, it also identifies two major bottlenecks, namely:
- Matching doesn’t always work right away; sometimes it takes several attempts. Lawyers and mediators do not always take on a case. Some complainants have contacted more than ten lawyers before finding one willing to represent them. This is a frustrating and emotionally draining process, as they have to recount their story over and over again, which takes a toll on the complainant.
- The attorneys indicate that the amount of compensation does not adequately reflect the time investment required. In other words, the allocated budget is rather small. Whistleblower cases are often complex, lengthy, and demanding. Some lawyers have explicitly stated that they have therefore decided to stop taking on whistleblower cases. Some whistleblowers also feel that the limited compensation affects how their case is handled. For example, they feared that their lawyer would not be able to devote enough time to their case.
We’ve also heard similar comments from the whistleblowers we speak with from time to time.
In addition, the researchers note that many people who report incidents are unaware of the existence of the resource. We believe this is a third bottleneck. The KWINK group further notes that the program often only comes into play once tensions with the employer have already escalated. As a result, in practice, it does not see the program contributing to the prevention or de-escalation of conflicts. Mediation could help address this, but it is rarely used through the program. It is noted that the program itself does contribute to the legal protection of whistleblowers.
Recommendations
The researchers then make a number of recommendations:
- Improve the matching process between clients and attorneys and gain a better understanding of why a match does not occur.
- Review the appropriateness of attorneys’ fees and adjust them as necessary.
- Increase awareness of the facility and make it easier to find.
Regarding this last recommendation, the researchers note that raising awareness could lead to an increase in the number of requests for advice submitted to the House. It is important to note that this service has been established only for a limited period. It must be clear to those filing reports whether and how this arrangement will be continued.
Finally, the KWINK Group believes it is important that confidential advisors, labor unions, and other parties—who are often the first to come into contact with potential whistleblowers—be actively informed about the support services available.
Of course, this topic will also be covered in our course “The Whistleblower Protection Act in Practice, ” which will be offered again soon. Click the link for more information and the registration form.
