Whistleblower Protection Act

The dismissal of a worker carried out by a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (i) (limited to one that directly employs the worker; the same applies in Article 9) is void if it is on the grounds that the worker, being a whistleblower, has conducted whistleblowing provided for in the respective following items in the cases stated in those items.

if the whistleblower considers that a reportable fact has occurred, or is about to occur:whistleblowing to the recipient of services or other designated person;

if the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur; or if the whistleblower considers that a reportable fact has occurred, or is about to occur, and submits a document stating the following matters (including a record made by an electronic method, a magnetic method, or any other method not recognizable to human senses; the same applies in (e) of the following item): whistleblowing to an administrative body or other designated person that has the authority to impose a disposition or make a recommendation or other act regarding the reportable fact:

the name and address or residence of the whistleblower;

details of the reportable fact;

reasons for considering that the reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur; and

reasons for considering that measures based on laws and regulations, or any other appropriate measures should be taken with respect to the reportable fact.

if the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur, and one of the following cases applies: whistleblowing report to a person to whom reporting the reportable fact is considered necessary to prevent its occurrence or the spread of damage it causes:

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that if they conduct whistleblowing provided for in the preceding two items, they will be subject to dismissal or other disadvantageous treatment;

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that if they conduct whistleblowing provided for in item (i), the evidence for the reportable fact might be concealed, counterfeited, or altered;

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that if they conduct whistleblowing as provided for in item (i), the recipient of services will divulge the information acquired with respect to the whistleblower without just cause despite knowing that the information enables the identification of the whistleblower;

it is requested that the whistleblower does not conduct whistleblowing provided for in the preceding two items by the recipient of services without just cause;

even if twenty days have elapsed from the day of conducting whistleblowing provided for in item (i) in writing, the whistleblower does not receive a notice from the relevant recipient of services or other designated person about the commencement of an investigation on the reportable fact, or the relevant recipient of services or other designated person does not investigate the reportable fact without just cause; or

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that harm to the life or physical wellbeing of an individual, or damage to the property of an individual (excluding an individual conducting business; the same applies below in this sub-item (f)) (limited to irreparable damage or substantial amount of damage to an extremely large number of individuals directly caused by the reportable fact; the same applies in Article 6, item (ii), (b) and item (iii), (b)) has occurred, or there is an imminent danger of its occurrence.

The cancellation of a worker dispatch contract (meaning a worker dispatch contract prescribed in Article 26, paragraph (1) of the Worker Dispatching Act) by a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (ii) is void if it is on the grounds that a whistleblower who is a dispatched worker working under the directions and orders of a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (ii) (limited to a business operator receiving provision of the services of worker dispatch related to the relevant dispatched worker; the same applies in this Article and Article 5, paragraph (2)) has conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of the preceding Article.

In addition to what is provided for in Article 3, a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (i) must not treat a whistleblower who is or was employed by the business operator in a disadvantageous manner, such as by demotion, reduction of salary, or non-payment of retirement allowance, or otherwise, on the grounds that the whistleblower has conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of Article 3.

In addition to what is provided for in the preceding Article, a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (ii) must not, on the grounds that a whistleblower who is a dispatched worker working under the directions and orders of the business operator has conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of Article 3, request that the business operator carrying out the worker dispatch related to the whistleblower replace the dispatched worker, or otherwise treat the whistleblower in a disadvantageous manner.

A business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (iv) (limited to a business operator stated in (a) of the item; the same applies in the following Article and Article 8, paragraph (4)) must not reduce the remuneration or otherwise treat the whistleblower disadvantageously (excluding dismissal) on the grounds that the whistleblower, who performs or performed duties for the business operator, has conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of the following Article.

If a whistleblower who is an officer is dismissed by the business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (iv) on the grounds of having conducted whistleblowing provided for in the respective following items in the cases stated in those items, the whistleblower may claim compensation for damages arising from the dismissal from the business operator.

if the whistleblower considers that a reportable fact has occurred, or is about to occur:whistleblowing to the recipient of services or other designated person;

if one of the following applies: whistleblowing to an administrative body or other designated person that has the authority to impose a disposition or make a recommendation or other act regarding the reportable fact:

if the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur despite efforts being made to conduct investigative and corrective measures (meaning measures necessary for investigation and correction of the reportable fact with the same level of care as that of a prudent manager; the same applies in (a) of the following item);

if the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur, and also that harm to the life or physical wellbeing of an individual, or damage to the property of an individual (excluding an individual conducting business) has occurred or there is an imminent danger of its occurrence.

if one of the following cases applies: whistleblowing to a person to whom reporting the reportable fact is considered necessary to prevent its occurrence or the spread of damage it causes:

if a whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur despite efforts being made to conduct investigative and corrective measures, and one of the following applies:

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that if they conduct whistleblowing provided for in the preceding two items, they will be subject to dismissal, reduction of remuneration, or other disadvantageous treatment;

the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that if they conduct whistleblowing provided for in item (i), the evidence for the reportable fact might be concealed, counterfeited, or altered;

it is requested that the whistleblower does not conduct whistleblowing provided for in the preceding two items by the recipient of services without just cause.

if the whistleblower has reasonable grounds to believe that a reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur, and also that harm to the life or physical wellbeing of an individual, or damage to the property of an individual (excluding an individual conducting business) has occurred or there is an imminent danger of its occurrence.

The business operator provided for in each item of Article 2, paragraph (1) may not claim compensation from the whistleblower who has conducted whistleblowing on the grounds that the business operator has suffered damage due to the whistleblowing provided for in each item of Article 3 and each item of the preceding Article.

The provisions of Articles 3 through 7 do not preclude the application of the provisions of other laws and regulations that prohibit dismissal or any other disadvantageous treatment of a person stated in the items of Article 2, paragraph (1) on the grounds of making a whistleblowing regarding a reportable fact.

The provisions of Article 3 do not preclude the application of the provisions of Article 16 of the Labor Contracts Act (Act No. 128 of 2007).

The provisions of Article 5, paragraph (1) do not preclude the application of the provisions of Articles 14 and 15 of the Labor Contracts Act.

The provisions of Article 6 do not preclude the application of the provisions of other laws and regulations to the effect that a person who has been dismissed as an officer by a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (iv) on the grounds of having made a report concerning a reportable fact may claim compensation for damages arising from the dismissal against the business operator.

The prohibition of dismissal or other disadvantageous treatment, on the grounds of having conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of Article 3, of national public employees in the regular service, court employees to whom the Act on Temporary Measures concerning Court Officials (Act No. 299 of 1951) applies, Diet employees to whom the Diet Officers Act (Act No. 85 of 1947) applies, corps personnel provided for in Article 2, paragraph (5) of the Self-Defense Forces Act (Act No. 165 of 1954), and local public employees in the regular service (referred to as "regular service national public employees, etc." in this Article) is governed, notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 3 through 5, by the provisions of the National Public Service Act (Act No. 120 of 1947; including as applied mutatis mutandis under the Act on Temporary Measures concerning Court Officials), the Diet Officers Act, the Self-Defense Forces Act, and the Local Public Service Act (Act No. 261 of 1950). In this case, a business operator provided for in Article 2, paragraph (1), item (i) must apply the provisions of those Acts so that no dismissal or other disadvantageous treatment is imposed on regular service national public employees, etc. on the grounds of having conducted whistleblowing provided for in the items of Article 3.

Any person who conducts whistleblowing as provided for in the items of Article 3 and the items of Article 6 must make efforts not to damage the legitimate interests of others and the public interest.