Ethics and governance in the European Financial centers

In a financial center some employers that fire an honest employee may make a pressure on him or her to have the employee sign a transaction with confidentiality clause .

This way the former employee that knows about a fraud issue, a corruption situation, an abuse in a contract with a business partner and of course a money laundering issue must keep silent on the facts and cannot testify in the future.

This is definitely a kind of obstruction to justice as a transaction is not intended for the pervertion of the integrity of the judicial system by preventing the demonstration of the truth.

Sometimes there is limited confidentiality clause for “The information which was granted to the employee after a request” or similar wording, even though the employer may repudiate later the wording and try to intimidate the former employee by suing him or her if he or she does his or her duty. In such case the justice should investigate to determine what's wrong with the company as there is definitely something wrong for the company to react like that.

But usually there is general confidentiality clause for “The information which the former employe knew” or similar wording.

Should such general clause be written, the testimony and evidence from the employee must be accepted: it is vital that the rules of evidence in criminal procedural codes permit this testimony and evidences in the name of the truth.
It is vital as well that criminal procedural and civil codes protect the former employee by admitting the legitimate breach in the transaction as the justice is not intended for the protection of illegal and/or criminal activities.