« French Fun | Main | Turkish Court Bans Youtube »

March 07, 2007


Fred Smith

There are very rich issues here. Whistleblowing is a very elucidating lens through which to view the battle of values that can arise even between seemingly compatable nations. And my American bias likely leads me to the view that there should be protections for whistleblowers. But what issues should be enforced across boundaries and which one's shouldn't? On the one hand, it's important to foster reciprocity, which sometimes may result in nation enforcing (or at least cooperating with) foreign laws that differ its own. Still, on the other hand, there are some laws that run counter to a nation's policy in such a fundamental way, that enforcement should not ensue. How do we tell the difference? And where does whistelblowing lie on this plane?

It seems to me there should be a heavy presumption in favor of enforcement-- absent a constitutional or clear contrary statutory difrective. It is goes without mention that reciprocity is important in our increasingly diverse world.

The comments to this entry are closed.