Who may handle reports of misconduct?
The law does not specify which role the handler must have. There is no mandatory title such as compliance officer or confidential advisor in the rules. What is clear, however, is that the person or group handling reports must be impartial and must have no conflict of interest with the report in question.
In practice, this means you choose who the handler is, as long as that choice guarantees this independence. This can be an employee, such as an HR manager or compliance officer, or an external party you engage for this purpose. What is important is that the person who is the subject of a report never handles that report themselves.
What impartiality means in concrete terms
Impartiality goes beyond 'having no quarrel with the person making the report'. It is about structural independence: the handler must not be in a chain of command that could influence the outcome. A director handling reports about his own management team is quickly in a difficult position, even if he has done nothing wrong himself. This is why many organizations opt for a dedicated handler with a clear role, and a substitute in case the report concerns the handler himself.
You should arrange this substitution in advance, not just when it is needed. In your reporting procedure, you set out who the first handler is and who steps in when there is a conflict of interest. This prevents a report from being left unhandled because no one feels competent to take it on.
One handler or a team
In larger organizations, handling is often carried out by a small team rather than one person. This has the advantage that knowledge and responsibility do not rest with one individual, and that someone is always available in case of absence. A disadvantage is that more people have access to sensitive information, which requires clear agreements on confidentiality.
Whether you choose one handler or a team, in both cases the circle of people who can view a report should be as small as possible. Whoever handles the report, the identity of the person making the report remains protected within that circle for anyone not directly involved in handling it.
Internal or external handling
Some organizations prefer to outsource handling to an external party, for example because the organization is small and no suitable internal role is available, or because they prefer to keep distance between the person making the report and management. This is permitted, as long as the final responsibility for follow-up remains with the employer. An external reporting channel facilitates the report and communication, but the assessment of what happens with the report is and remains a task of the organization itself.
This choice — internal, external, or a combination — is often set down by employees in the reporting procedure that also goes to the works council for approval. Who exactly is responsible and how that person or team was chosen is therefore also part of what the council assesses.
Why this also matters to employees
Employees considering making a report often want to know in advance who their report will go to. Lack of clarity on this is one of the reasons why people delay making a report or do not make one at all. If it is clearly stated in the information to employees who the handler is and how impartiality is guaranteed, this lowers the threshold for reporting. This makes the subject not only a legal matter, but also a practical one: the better this is explained, the better your channel achieves its purpose.
If you want to check how this is precisely included in the legislation, it is advisable to consult the original text or ask a legal professional about the specific requirements that apply to your sector and organization. Rules on impartiality are also shaped by how supervisory authorities and the courts deal with them in practice, and this sometimes changes.
On signalo.eu you can read in the knowledge base by subject how the processing is arranged, including the reference in the official text. The processing environment of the platform supports the designated handler with a clear working environment and automatically running deadlines, but the choice of who fulfills that role remains always with the employer.
Finally
Whether the obligation applies to your organization, and what must precisely be in place, depends on the number of workers and sometimes on the sector. If you are uncertain about this, you can see in a few questions approximately where you stand. If you have a specific question about your own situation, we recommend discussing it with a legal professional; we structure and monitor the process, but do not assess reports ourselves and provide no legal advice.
Would you first like to calmly read how other parts of the reporting obligation fit together, for example how workers are informed about the channel or how the deadlines work exactly? Check the frequently asked questions, or do the free quick-scan to see which steps are relevant for your organization.