Module Learning Objective

recognise submission stages and preserve follow-up access

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

This video focuses on how to recognise submission stages and preserve follow-up access. Follow the sequence of decisions in the example rather than simply memorising a list. Notice who is involved, what information is needed and the expected result. These points help turn the content into a practice that another person can verify. 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.

A draft and an uploaded attachment do not establish submission. External receipt is acknowledged without delay and within seven days of receipt, subject to the statutory request and identity-protection exceptions. Article 25(5) provides feedback normally within 30 and at most 90 days, or up to six months in justified cases. It does not expressly identify the initial event as the internal provision does.

Apply the following rule: Internal receipt must be acknowledged within 7 days of receipt. Feedback is normally due within 30 days and no later than 90 days from acknowledgement or, if none was sent, expiry of 7 days after submission. This is not a general deadline for finishing the investigation. The reporting person must be informed of the outcome in writing without delay. The confidential person reports received reports and outcomes to the Ombudswoman in writing within 30 days of deciding the report. External acknowledgement is without delay and within 7 days of receipt, subject to statutory exceptions. Article 25(5) provides for external feedback normally within 30 days, no later than 90 days, or up to 6 months in justified cases.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Use a mock-up with fictional data. Show recipient, draft, simulated submission and safe storage of confirmation. Explain follow-up access. Do not send a test report to an actual authority. Verify the current official interface before recording and do not invent a trigger absent from the provision. 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

A user sees an uploaded document and assumes submission, although status remains draft. In another simulation submission succeeds but the follow-up code is lost. The demonstration corrects both errors and distinguishes case status from an automatic message. 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 a visible attachment prove that a communication was submitted? 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. Check submission status or the portal's confirmation. Keep reference and follow-up instructions securely. A draft or visible attachment does not establish receipt by the authority.

One mistake to avoid is: using real data in training recordings or submitting test reports to an authority.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The platform uses a fixed 90-day period for every country, starting when someone opens the message. Can this setting be retained?

Not without validating the local rule. Use the correct starting event and unit, distinguish acknowledgement from follow-up and allow only permitted extensions. Test receipt outside working hours, month-end dates and the responsible person's absence. Opening a message does not automatically change the legal date of receipt.

National Legal Framework: Zakon o zaštiti prijavitelja nepravilnosti, transposing Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law.