“Charlton’s case is now on appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, which will have to decide whether the narrow and technical interpretation given to the concept of ‘employer’, as it is used in the Protected Disclosures Act of 2000 by the Labour Appeal Court, can be allowed to stand. Charlton lost his job, so he alleges, because he had the courage to blow the whistle on the Travelgate scheme.
But, so says the Labour Appeal Court, the MPs he shopped are not his employer and he is accordingly not entitled to the protection of an act designed to protect employees from what it calls ‘occupational detriment’”.
View or download the Labour Appeal Court judgment of Patel JA dated 21 July 2010 in Parliament of the Republic of South Africa v Charlton  JOL 26026;  10 BLLR 1024 (LAC) – Courtesy of SFALII.
The Labour Court judgment of Ngcamu AJ dated 11 June 2007 in Charlton v Parliament of the Republic of South Africa  10 BLLR 943; (2007) ILJ 2263 (LC) can also be viewed or downloaded, courtesy of SAFLII.
Paul Hoffman, director of the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa, has drawn attention to the plight of Harry Charlton and written an article in Business Day today – Whistle-blowers: State lacks the will to protect those who expose corruption.
The above extract and the one following are taken from that article and it is recommended you read the entire article on the Business Day website.
“THE curtain has finally rung down on the long-running Travelgate saga, one that will live in infamy in the annals of SA’s parliamentary history. While the last of those few unlucky enough to be criminally charged sink back into the plush green leather of the parliamentary benches with a sigh of relief that proper punishment and curtailment of parliamentary careers did not feature, spare a thought for the man who started it all, Harry Charlton. He blew the whistle, lost his job and is still fighting for redress in the courts”.