Whistleblowing mechanism: what factors make it effective?

Authors

  • Putu Wira Dharma Universitas Pendidikan Nasional Denpasar
  • Agus Fredy Maradona Universitas Pendidikan Nasional Denpasar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26905/pjiap.v10i1.14813

Keywords:

Fraud, Whistleblowing, Whistleblowing triangle, Transparansi, Akuntabilitas

Abstract

Fraud cases have become a serious and global problem that has a wide impact on various sectors, including the government sector. Fraudulent practices in public institutions not only harm the state financially but also weaken public trust in government institutions. One of the preventive efforts that is now widely developed is the implementation of the Whistleblowing mechanism, namely a reporting system that allows individuals to report unethical or illegal actions without fear of retaliation. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the implementation of the Whistleblowing mechanism in the Klungkung Regency Government using the whistleblowing Triangle approach, which includes three main elements: opportunity, pressure, and rationalization. This study uses a qualitative method with data collection techniques through in-depth interviews with related officials, field observations, and analysis of internal policy documents. Data were analyzed using NVivo software to identify key themes and emerging patterns. The results of the study indicate that although the whistleblowing system has been formally established, its effectiveness is still hampered by low motivation of reporters, lack of protection for reporters, and minimal trust in the available mechanisms. This study recommends improving the reporting system, strengthening regulations for protecting whistleblowers, and internalizing integrity values to strengthen transparency and accountability in the public sector, especially in the Klungkung Regency Government

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ACFE. (2022). Occupational Fraud 2022: A Report To The Nations. In Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.

ACFE. (2024). Association of Certified Fraud Examiners The Nations Occupational Fraud 2024/ :A Report To The Nations. In Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.

ACFE Global. (2020). Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse: 2020 Global Fraud Study. In Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. https://acfepublic.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/2020-Report-to-the-Nations.pdf

ACFE Indonesia. (2016). Survey Fraud Indonesia 2016. In ACFE Indonesia Chapter.

Ankamah, S. S. (2019). Why do “teeth” need “voice”? The case of anti-corruption agencies in three

Australian states. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 78(4), 481–496. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12374

Bogdan, R. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th.). Pearson.

Brandão, C. (2015). P. Bazeley and K. Jackson, Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo (2nd ed.).Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(4), 492–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.992750

Defitri, S. Y., Bahari, A., Handra, H., & Febrianto, R. (2020). Determinant factors of e-government implementation and public accountability: Toe framework approach. Public Policy and Administration, 19(4), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-20-19-4-03

Dell, M., Lane, N., & Querubin, P. (2018). The Historical State, Local Collective Action, and Economic Development in Vietnam. Econometrica, 86(6), 2083–2121. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA15122

Fumarola, A. (2021). Making the government accountable: rethinking immigration as an issue in the European Union. European Politics and Society, 22(1), 140–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2020.1752453

Gao, J., Greenberg, R., & Wong-On-Wing, B. (2015). Whistleblowing intentions of lower-level employees: The effect of reporting channel, bystanders, and wrongdoer power status. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(1), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2008-4

Gao, L., & Brink, A. G. (2017). Whistleblowing studies in accounting research: A review of experimental studies on the determinants of whistleblowing. Journal of Accounting Literature, 38(April), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acclit.2017.05.001

Gunawan, B., Hanjani, A., & Humairoh, N. A. (2020). Meninjau Aspek Pencegahan Fraud: Studi Kasus di KPP Pratama Sukabumi. Jati: Jurnal Akuntansi Terapan Indonesia, 3(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.18196/jati.030230

Ilham Nurhidayat, & Kusumasari, B. (2016). Strengthening the Effectiveness of Whistleblowing System A Study for the Implementation of Anti-Corruption Policy in Indonesia. Journal of Financial Crime. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-11-2016-0069

Komite Nasional Kebijakan Governance (KNKG). (2018). Pedoman Sistem Pelaporan Pelanggaran - SPP (Whistleblowing System - WBS).

Latan, H., Ringle, C. M., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2018). Whistleblowing intentions among public accountants in Indonesia: Testing for the moderation effects. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(2), 573–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3318-0

Luthfi, A., Poespitohadi, W., Putra, I. M. A. W. W., & Mawarni, D. I. (2025). QUALITY EDUCATION IN ACHIEVING THE SDGS IN INDONESIA. Mediasosian: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Administrasi Negara, 9(01). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30737/mediasosian.v9i1.6699

Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (2016). After the wrongdoing: What managers should know about whistleblowing. Business Horizons, 59(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.09.007

Njoku, E. T. (2021). State-oriented service-delivery partnership with civil society organizations in the context of counter-terrorism in Nigeria. Development Policy Review, 39(5), 757–772. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12524

Pramono, A. J., & Aruzzi, M. I. (2023). Penerapan whistleblowing system di Instansi Pemerintah sebagai inisiatif gerakan antikorupsi di Indonesia. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 9(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v9i2.942

Putra, I. M. A. W. W., & Wardhani, A. S. (2024). Decentralization Policy Implementation in Malang City ’ s Public Service. J-TRAGOS: Journal of Transformative Governance and Social Justice, 2(2), 103–119. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26905/jtragos.v2i2.13387

Ramezani, M. J., Sepasi, S., Etemadi, H., & ... (2021). Modeling Accountant Whistleblowing Intention. Accounting and Auditing Review, 28(4), 637–663. https://journals.ut.ac.ir/article_85111_58d07faee75b245311b5994a0a1be094.pdf

Schultz, D., & Harutyunyan, K. (2015). Combating corruption: The development of whistleblowing laws in the United States, Europe, and Armenia. International Comparative Jurisprudence, 1(2), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icj.2015.12.005

Smaili, N. (2023). Building an ethical culture by improving conditions for whistleblowing. Journal of Business Strategy, 44(1), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-07-2021-0123

Styer, L. M., Hoen, R., Rock, J., Yauney, E., Nemeth, K., Bievenue, R., & Parker, M. M. (2021). High-Throughput Multiplex SARS-CoV-2 IgG Microsphere Immunoassay for Dried Blood Spots:A Public Health Strategy for Enhanced Serosurvey Capacity. Microbiology Spectrum, 9(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1128/Spectrum.00134-21

Triantoro, H. D., Utami, I., & Joseph, C. (2020). Whistleblowing system, Machiavellian personality, fraud intention: An experimental study. Journal of Financial Crime, 27(1), 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-01-2019-0003

Wahyudi, S., Achmad, T., & Pamungkas, I. D. (2019). Whistleblowing system and fraud early warning system on village fund fraud: The Indonesian experience. International Journal of Financial Research, 10(6), 211–217. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v10n6p211

Zakaria, M. (2015). Antecedent Factors of Whistleblowing in Organizations. Procedia Economics and Finance, 28(April), 230–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(15)01104-1

Downloads

Published

2025-06-11

How to Cite

Dharma, P. W., & Maradona, A. F. (2025). Whistleblowing mechanism: what factors make it effective?. Publisia: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik, 10(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.26905/pjiap.v10i1.14813

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1: April 2025

Section

PUBLISIA: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Publisia: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Copyright of the published articles will be transferred to the journal as the publisher of the manuscripts. Therefore, the author confirms that the copyright has been managed by the journal.
  2. Publisher of Publisia: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik University of Merdeka Malang.
  3. The copyright follows Creative Commons Attribution and share a like License (CC BY SA): This license allows to Share and copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, Adaptative remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially.