Whoever handles reports of misconduct or undesired conduct must be able to do so impartially. To demonstrate and safeguard this, you need a number of documents: an appointment decision stating who the handler is, a job description outlining their authority, agreements on impartiality, a substitution arrangement for situations where a report concerns the handler themselves, and a confidentiality declaration.
The document most often missing or incomplete is the substitution arrangement. This is precisely where the detail at the heart of this matter lies: what happens if a report cannot be handled neutrally by the designated handler—for example, because the report concerns that person themselves, a close colleague, or someone to whom the handler reports. Without a documented alternative, you create exactly the situation the law aims to prevent: a report assessed by someone who is directly involved.
The appointment decision: who handles the report
The starting point is a brief, written decision in which the management or leadership formally designates who will act as the handler. This can be an internal employee, such as a compliance officer or HR manager, or an external party. The decision states the name or position, the scope of the task, and the date on which the appointment takes effect. This document should also be reflected in the reporting procedure itself, so employees know who to turn to with a report.
Setting out tasks and authority
In addition to who handles reports, it must also be clear what the handler may and may not do. Think of the authority to conduct investigations, to speak with those involved, and to monitor the deadlines for acknowledgement of receipt and feedback. This job description prevents confusion about the role, especially in smaller organizations where the same person holds multiple positions. In the knowledge base where this is worked out for each situation there is more on how that combination of roles relates to the requirement of impartiality.
Impartiality: the point where things go wrong
Impartiality means the handler has no interest in the outcome and is not the person the report concerns, or someone directly involved in the matter. In practice, this most often becomes problematic in organizations where one person handles both HR tasks and the handling of reports. A written description of how the organization ensures impartiality should therefore be among the standard documents. This can be a brief paragraph in the procedure itself, with a concrete rule: if the report concerns the handler or a direct colleague, a pre-designated substitute or external party takes over the matter.
A substitute for when the handler themselves cannot be impartial
This substitution arrangement is the document that organizations most often skip over, because it describes a situation that may never occur. Yet this is precisely the document that oversight and any audit will examine: is there an alternative option if the designated handler cannot be impartial. Document who the substitute is, how that person is brought in, and how the person making the report is informed about this without compromising their anonymity.
Confidentiality and record-keeping
The handler typically also signs a confidentiality declaration that specifically concerns the identity of the person making the report and the content of the report. This is a separate document from the general employment contract, because it concerns a special responsibility that does not automatically follow from a job description. This document too belongs in the file you maintain, together with the appointment decision and the job description.
All in all
These documents together form the evidence that the handling of reports is carefully structured: who handles them, with what authority, how impartiality is ensured, who steps in if there is a conflict of interest, and how confidentiality is established. On the frequently asked questions page about the role of the person handling reports you will find additional examples of situations in which these documents are consulted in practice.
Whether these documents are complete in your situation depends on the size of your organization and the roles that already exist there. A lawyer or the competent supervisory authority can assess that for your specific situation; Signalo facilitates and structures, but does not assess reports itself and does not provide legal advice.
Would you first like to see what these documents look like in practice and where the information on this page comes from? Take the free quick-scan via a few short questions that show what applies to your organization, or view on the page that shows where our information is based how we mention the source for each topic.