MAINSYSTEMS 
distinguish the purpose of each institutional contact
1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards
In this video we will work through a concrete decision: distinguish the purpose of each institutional contact. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. External reporting, retaliation protection and institutional reports have different purposes, actors and deadlines. This course applies the Croatian Act with its 2025 amendments. Demonstrations are fictional and send no real reports.
The Ombudsman is competent for external reporting and whistleblower protection, while the underlying irregularity may fall to another authority. Article 22(2)(6) requires the confidential person to report in writing to the Ombudsman about received reports and outcomes within 30 days of deciding. This is not a general annual-statistics duty for all companies.
Apply the following rule: The Ombudswoman is the competent external reporting authority and can be approached directly without prior internal reporting. The November 2025 amendment extends the same protection, subject to statutory conditions, to direct reports to the police or State Attorney’s Office within their competence. Where those bodies are informed of retaliation or its risk, they must forward the report to the Ombudswoman without delay. Do not generalise this rule to every direct report to any authority. Public disclosure has separate Article 26 conditions.
2. Practical Implementation & Procedure
State the intended result: reporting a breach, obtaining advice, requesting protection or meeting a reporting duty. Consult the official page and legal remit. Identify minimum necessary data. Where an authority has several roles, select the matching procedure and keep the source consulted. Do not reuse a form merely because it is familiar. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.
3. Case Study & Compliance Action
The confidential person has decided on an internal report while the worker is considering external reporting. The team separates its institutional report from the worker’s right to use the external route and maintains separate records. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.
The exercise is as follows: Does the confidential person’s institutional report replace the worker’s external-reporting right? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.
No. They are distinct actions and responsibilities. The person may report directly externally, while the confidential person separately fulfils the statutory duty.
One mistake to avoid is: turning a duty following a decision into an invented annual return.
Now apply the national rule to a second decision. An advice page is presented as the sole destination for every report. What check is missing?
The recipient's powers and role must be confirmed. Advice, external receipt, investigation and protection may belong to different bodies. Also check the national conditions for the selected route. User information must help people find the correct procedure without requiring steps that do not exist in law.