Dalkılıç, Elvin Evrim2025-02-122025-02-122024-08-121354-3725https://hdl.handle.net/11693/116221This article underscores the critical need for robust legal protections for whistleblowers in Europewhile critiquing the inconsistencies observed in the judgments of the European Court of HumanRights (ECtHR). The Court established six criteria in the Guja judgment to evaluateinterferences in whistleblowing cases. Among these, the criteria concerning the authenticity ofthe information disclosed by the whistleblower and their good faith in the Court's assessmentappear to be particularly problematic. The Court's fluctuating application of these criteriaundermines the development of a coherent judicial approach. Ensuring consistency in its rulingsis crucial for the Court to avoid creating a chilling effect on prospective whistleblowers.EnglishWhistleblowerEuropean Court of Human RightsFreedom of expressionLegal protectionCase lawArticle10.54648/euro20240201875-8207