Good faith
In whistleblower protection law, good faith means the requirement that, at the time of reporting, the reporting person had reasonable grounds to believe that the reported information about violations was true.
Good faith is a central condition for protection under the German Whistleblower Protection Act (HinSchG). Not every report is protected, but only one where the reporting person, at the time of the report or disclosure, had reasonable grounds to believe that the information they reported was true. The standard is therefore objectified: what matters is whether a reasonable person in the specific situation and with the reporting person's knowledge would have been entitled to consider the assumption of accuracy justified.
Crucially, protection does not depend on the suspicion being confirmed later. If a reported violation subsequently turns out to be unfounded, protection against reprisals remains intact as long as the reporting person was legitimately entitled to assume that their information was true. The motive behind the report is also irrelevant; the law does not require an altruistic or selfless intention. Good faith is, however, lacking where the person knew that the information was untrue, or should have recognised this upon reasonable consideration.
Good-faith reporting must be distinguished from the deliberate or grossly negligent reporting of false information. Anyone who knowingly provides false tips enjoys no protection and may become liable for damages; such conduct may also be sanctioned as an administrative offence. In practice, good faith strikes an important balance: reporting persons are encouraged to report suspicions without having to prove the violation, while knowingly false reports and denunciations remain excluded from the scope of protection.
Legal Basis
Section 33 (1) no. 3 HinSchG, Section 38 HinSchG (damages), Art. 6 EU Whistleblowing Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/1937)
Practical Example
An employee in the accounting department repeatedly notices invoices from a supplier that appear unusually high and for which no recognisable consideration exists. Suspecting corruption, she reports her concern through the internal reporting channel. The subsequent investigation reveals that the invoices were lawful and related to an internal special project. Because the employee had reasonable grounds, based on the documents available to her, to assume a violation, she acted in good faith and is fully protected against reprisals, even though the suspicion was not confirmed. The compliance officer documents this assessment to provide audit-proof evidence of the protected status.