Obedience and Disobedience in the Context of Whistleblowing: An Attempt at Conceptual Clarification

The paper aims to give some conceptual clarifications to two interrelated issues, disobedience and whistleblowing. There is an obvious difference on the intuitive level – disobedience is considered wrong and blameworthy while whistleblowing has the aura of something positive and desirable. However, despite the differences, the logic of their constitution and functioning is, at least in part, alike, making the matter of real interest when are they justified – taking they prima facie are not justified. I propose that justification (of both) resides in a valid aspiration to justification. Starting from there, I offer an analysis in five sections. In the first section, I analyze the nature, functioning, and scope of loyalty and obedience as instruments of attaining responsible coordination and cooperation in complex human structures requiring hierarchies and discipline. The main features we encounter as relevant in this analysis are the concepts of loyalty, sincerity, trust and confidence, a strong sense of belonging and responsibility. In the second section I explore how dissent and disobedience get motivational force in the context of uncertainty. It is the context in which loyalty becomes divided, producing opposing motivations. The institutionally constituted obligations conflict with a need to dissent, disobey and resist when obeying or fulfilling established expectations is perceived as risky, dangerous, humiliating or wrong. The motivations may be different, and it is an interesting question – what is more critical or characteristic in making decisions to dissent. Warning against potential harm, preventing crime, or just avoiding complicity are the most visible motives, but there are possibly many, not all of them necessarily justified. The third section briefly explores some conditions for possibly justified whistleblowing. These conditions include: competence, good intent, existence of some real risk and facing a dilemma what to do; missing any of these conditions would make an act something else or unjustified. In the fourth section, I explore a question of whether an act of whistleblowing is a mere right or a duty – or a different issue like supererogation, an act which is beyond the duty, implying that it is, like any other sacrifice, something we have the right not to engage in. In connection with this, there is a problem of codification, i.e., legal protection of whistleblowers; both insufficient protection and overprotection have their deficiencies and shortcomings. In the fifth section, I apply this analysis to military issues. I find that there are three types of morally relevant cases of disobedience, indicating that the most difficult one is the case of manifestly legal but at the same time morally wrong orders.

1. Babić J. (2007) Non-Culpable Ignorance and Just War Theory. Philosophy and Society. Vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 59–68.

2. Babić J. (2019) Belonging as a Social and Institutional Fact. Philosophia. Vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 1341–1354.

3. Beauchamp T.L. & Bowie E.N. (Eds.) (2004) Ethical Theory and Business. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.

4. Boatright J. (2009) Ethics and the Conduct of Business. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.

5. Davis M. (1996) Some Paradoxes of Whistleblowing. Business and Professional Ethics Journal. Vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 3–19.

6. De George R. (2006) Business Ethics (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.

7. Devine T. (2015) International Best Practices for Whistleblower Statutes. In: Lewis D. & Vandekerckhove W. (Eds.) Developments in Whistleblowing Research 2015 (pp. 7–19). London: International Whistleblowing Research Network.

8. Foust M.A. (2012) Loyalty to Loyalty, Josiah Royce and the Genuine Moral Life. New York: Fordham University Press.

9. Hyde R. & Savage A. (2015) Whistleblowing without Borders: The Risks and Rewards of Transnational Whistleblowing Networks. In: Lewis D. & Vandekerckhove W. (Eds.) Developments in Whistleblowing Research 2015 (pp. 20–34). London: International Whistleblowing Research Network.

10. Iannone A.P. (Ed.) (1989) Contemporary Moral Controversies’ in Business. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

11. Kenny K. (2015) Constructing Selves: Whistleblowing And The Role Of Time. In: Lewis D. & Vandekerckhove W. (Eds.) Developments in Whistleblowing Research 2015 (pp. 70–85). London: International Whistleblowing Research Network.

12. Kleinig J. (2017) Loyalty. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/loyalty/.

13. Kusari F. (2015) Whistleblower Rights In European Union Civilian Missions: EULEX Leaks. In: Lewis D., & Vandekerckhove W. (Eds.) Developments in Whistleblowing Research 2015 (pp. 34–50). London: International Whistleblowing Research Network.

14. Lowe D. (2012, 9 February) Roger Boisjoly and the Management Hat. In the Pipeline. Retrieved from https://www.science.org/blogs/pipeline

15. Near J.P. & Miceli M.P. (1985). Organizational Dissidence: The Case of Whistle-Blowing. Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–16.

16. Pennisi E. (1990) Challenger’s Whistle-Blower: Hero and Outcast. The Scientist. Vol. 4, no. 2.

17. Shaw W.H. (Ed.) (2003) Ethics at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

18. Walden S., & Edwards B. (2014) Whistleblower Protection in International Governmental Organization. In: Brown A.J., Lewis D., Moberly R.E., & Vandekerckhove W. (Eds.) International Handbook on Whistleblowing Research (pp. 430–456). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.