第二章 公益通報をしたことを理由とする公益通報者の解雇の無効及び不利益な取扱いの禁止等
Chapter II Invalidity of Dismissal of, and Prohibition of Disadvantageous Treatment of, Whistleblowers on the Grounds of Whistleblowing
Article 3Invalidity of Dismissal
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;
公益通報者の氏名又は名称及び住所又は居所
details of the reportable fact;
当該通報対象事実の内容
reasons for considering that the reportable fact has occurred or is about to occur; and
当該通報対象事実が生じ、又はまさに生じようとしていると思料する理由
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.
Article 4Invalidity of Cancellation of a Worker Dispatch Contract
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.
Article 5Prohibition of Disadvantageous Treatment
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.
Article 6Claim for Compensation for Damages in the Case of Dismissal as an Officer
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.
通報対象事実が生じ、又はまさに生じようとしていると信ずるに足りる相当の理由があり、かつ、個人の生命若しくは身体に対する危害又は個人（事業を行う場合におけるものを除く。）の財産に対する損害が発生し、又は発生する急迫した危険があると信ずるに足りる相当の理由がある場合
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.
通報対象事実が生じ、又はまさに生じようとしていると信ずるに足りる相当の理由があり、かつ、個人の生命若しくは身体に対する危害又は個人（事業を行う場合におけるものを除く。）の財産に対する損害が発生し、又は発生する急迫した危険があると信ずるに足りる相当の理由がある場合
Article 7Limitation of Claims for Damages
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.
Article 8Interpretative Provisions
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).
第三条の規定は、労働契約法（平成十九年法律第百二十八号）第十六条の規定の適用を妨げるものではない。
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.
Article 9Treatment of Regular Service National Public Employees or Other Public Employees
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.
第三条各号に定める公益通報をしたことを理由とする一般職の国家公務員、裁判所職員臨時措置法（昭和二十六年法律第二百九十九号）の適用を受ける裁判所職員、国会職員法（昭和二十二年法律第八十五号）の適用を受ける国会職員、自衛隊法（昭和二十九年法律第百六十五号）第二条第五項に規定する隊員及び一般職の地方公務員（以下この条において「一般職の国家公務員等」という。）に対する免職その他不利益な取扱いの禁止については、第三条から第五条までの規定にかかわらず、国家公務員法（昭和二十二年法律第百二十号。裁判所職員臨時措置法において準用する場合を含む。）、国会職員法、自衛隊法及び地方公務員法（昭和二十五年法律第二百六十一号）の定めるところによる。この場合において、第二条第一項第一号に定める事業者は、第三条各号に定める公益通報をしたことを理由として一般職の国家公務員等に対して免職その他不利益な取扱いがされることのないよう、これらの法律の規定を適用しなければならない。
Article 10Respect for the Legitimate Interests of Others
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.
定義第二条第一項・法令全体に適用
次の各号に掲げる者が、不正の利益を得る目的、他人に損害を加える目的その他の不正の目的でなく、当該各号に定める事業者（法人その他の団体及び事業を行う個人をいう。以下同じ。）（以下「役務提供先」という。）又は当該役務提供先の事業に従事する場合におけるその役員（法人の取締役、執行役、会計参与、監査役、理事、監事及び清算人並びにこれら以外の者で法令（法律及び法律に基づく命令をいう。以下同じ。）の規定に基づき法人の経営に従事している者（会計監査人を除く。）をいう。以下同じ。）、従業員、代理人その他の者について通報対象事実が生じ、又はまさに生じようとしている旨を、当該役務提供先若しくは当該役務提供先があらかじめ定めた者（以下「役務提供先等」という。）、当該通報対象事実について処分（命令、取消しその他公権力の行使に当たる行為をいう。以下同じ。）若しくは勧告等（勧告その他処分に当たらない行為をいう。以下同じ。）をする権限を有する行政機関若しくは当該行政機関があらかじめ定めた者（次条第二号及び第六条第二号において「行政機関等」という。）又はその者に対し当該通報対象事実を通報することがその発生若しくはこれによる被害の拡大を防止するために必要であると認められる者（当該通報対象事実により被害を受け又は受けるおそれがある者を含み、当該役務提供先の競争上の地位その他正当な利益を害するおそれがある者を除く。次条第三号及び第六条第三号において同じ。）に通報すること
わかりやすく言うと
労働者、派遣労働者、役員など、不正な目的でなく、自分の勤め先などの事業者やその役員・従業員などについて通報対象事実が生じ、又は生じようとしていることを、その事業者等、処分などの権限のある行政機関等、又は被害の発生や拡大の防止に必要と認められる一定の者に知らせることです。
定義第二条第一項
勧告その他処分に当たらない行為
わかりやすく言うと
勧告など、処分（命令や取消しなど公権力の行使に当たる行為）には当たらない行為のことです。
略称規定第二条第一項
この法律において「公益通報」とは、次の各号に掲げる者が、不正の利益を得る目的、他人に損害を加える目的その他の不正の目的でなく、当該各号に定める事業者（法人その他の団体及び事業を行う個人をいう。以下同じ。）（以下「役務提供先」という。）又は…
わかりやすく言うと
公益通報をする人ごとに定められた事業者で、労働者なら自分を使用し、又は通報の日前一年以内に使用していた事業者、派遣労働者なら派遣を受け、又は一年以内に受けていた事業者、役員なら職務を行わせる事業者などです。
略称規定第二条第一項
…従業員、代理人その他の者について通報対象事実が生じ、又はまさに生じようとしている旨を、当該役務提供先若しくは当該役務提供先があらかじめ定めた者（以下「役務提供先等」という。）…
わかりやすく言うと
公益通報をする人の勤め先などにあたる事業者（役務提供先）と、その事業者があらかじめ定めた者のことです。
略称規定第二条第一項・この規定及び第三条第一項第二号及び第六条第一項第二号の中だけ
この法律において「公益通報」とは、次の各号に掲げる者が、不正の利益を得る目的、他人に損害を加える目的その他の不正の目的でなく、当該各号に定める事業者（法人その他の団体及び事業を行う個人をいう。以下同じ。）（以下「役務提供先」という。）又は…
わかりやすく言うと
通報対象事実について処分や勧告などをする権限を持つ行政機関と、その行政機関があらかじめ定めた者のことです。
定義第二条第一項第一号
労働基準法（昭和二十二年法律第四十九号）第九条に規定する労働者
わかりやすく言うと
職業の種類を問わず、事業や事務所に使用され、賃金を支払われる人のことです（労働基準法第九条）。
定義第二条第一項第二号・この規定及び第四条及び第五条第二項の中だけ
同条第一号に規定する労働者派遣
わかりやすく言うと
自分が雇う労働者を、その雇用関係のまま他人の指揮命令を受けてその他人のために働かせることです。その他人に雇わせる約束をしてするものは含みません（労働者派遣法第二条第一号）。
略称規定第二条第一項第二号・この規定及び第四条の中だけ
派遣労働者（労働者派遣事業の適正な運営の確保及び派遣労働者の保護等に関する法律（昭和六十年法律第八十八号。第四条において「労働者派遣法」という。）第二条第二号に規定する派遣労働者をいう。以下同じ。）又は派遣労働者であった者 当該派遣労働者…
わかりやすく言うと
労働者派遣事業の適正な運営の確保及び派遣労働者の保護等に関する法律（昭和六十年法律第八十八号）を短く呼んだ名前です。
定義第二条第一項第二号
労働者派遣事業の適正な運営の確保及び派遣労働者の保護等に関する法律（昭和六十年法律第八十八号。第四条において「労働者派遣法」という。）第二条第二号に規定する派遣労働者
わかりやすく言うと
事業主が雇用する労働者で、労働者派遣の対象となる人のことです（労働者派遣法第二条第二号）。
定義第二条第三項・法令全体に適用
次の各号のいずれかの事実
わかりやすく言うと
この法律と、生命や財産などを守るため別表に挙げる法律（命令を含む）に定める犯罪行為の事実や過料の理由とされる事実です。別表の法律に基づく処分に違反するとそうした事実となる場合のその処分の理由となる事実も含み、その理由が別の処分への違反や勧告などに従わないことなら、それらの理由となる事実も含みます。
定義第六条第一項第二号イ・この規定及び第六条第一項第三号イの中だけ
善良な管理者と同一の注意をもって行う、通報対象事実の調査及びその是正のために必要な措置
略称規定第九条第一項・この条の中だけ
…国会職員法（昭和二十二年法律第八十五号）の適用を受ける国会職員、自衛隊法（昭和二十九年法律第百六十五号）第二条第五項に規定する隊員及び一般職の地方公務員（以下この条において「一般職の国家公務員等」という。）に対する免職その他不利益な取扱…
わかりやすく言うと
一般職の国家公務員、裁判所職員臨時措置法が適用される裁判所職員、国会職員法が適用される国会職員、自衛隊法に定める隊員、一般職の地方公務員をまとめた呼び方です。公益通報を理由とする免職などの禁止には、第三条から第五条ではなく国家公務員法、国会職員法、自衛隊法、地方公務員法が適用されます。
無効
初めから法律上の効力がないことです。無効な行為は、追認しても効力を生じず、無効であることを知って追認したときは新たな行為をしたものとみなされます（民法第百十九条）。公の秩序又は善良の風俗に反する法律行為は無効です（同法第九十条）。また、一方を守るための法律の中には、その保護を失わせる定めを無効とするものがあります。借地権の存続期間や更新についての借地借家法の定めに反する特約で借地人に不利なもの（借地借家法第九条）、事業者の債務不履行により消費者に生じた損害を賠償する責任の全部を免除する消費者契約の条項（消費者契約法第八条第一項第一号）、労働基準法で定める基準に達しない労働条件を定める労働契約の部分（労働基準法第十三条。無効となった部分は同法の基準によります）がその例です。
民法第90条・第119条、借地借家法第9条、消費者契約法第8条、労働基準法第13条を参考にAIが作成。