MAINSYSTEMS 
classify communications by their facts and the applicable rules
1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards
In this video we will work through a concrete decision: classify communications by their facts and the applicable rules. 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. Triage selects the appropriate next action without prejudging responsibility. Competence, urgency, evidential quality and conflicts are separate dimensions. Information protection also applies during initial assessment.
A complaint often seeks correction of a service or decision. A whistleblowing report concerns a possible breach. An ethics report may describe a violation of internal rules outside the legal scope of whistleblower protection. These categories can overlap. Initial classification is an organisational tool and should remain open to revision.
Apply the following rule: ZZPri covers information about breaches of rules applicable in Slovenia obtained in a work-related context. Protection requires reasonable grounds for believing the information true at the time of reporting and use of a route under the Act. Article 5 excludes protection where the report is made two years or more after the breach ceased. This is not a retention period. Relevant previous and developing relationships, facilitators and connected persons are covered under statutory conditions.
2. Practical Implementation & Procedure
Read the full account and identify the request and alleged facts. Check whether the matter falls within legislation or internal policy. If referral is needed, assess whether sharing is lawful and send only necessary information. Avoid automatically forwarding the entire message to an ordinary department, especially where it reveals identity or contains sensitive material. 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 supplier complains about delayed payment and adds that someone requested a commission to release the invoice. The accounting delay and commission allegation require distinct handling. 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: Can the whole message be sent to procurement without review? 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. First assess the sensitive allegation, conflicts and necessary scope. A business query must not defeat safe reporting.
One mistake to avoid is: classifying a communication solely by its opening sentence or the department mentioned.
Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The system automatically marks a report protected because it contains the word corruption. What has it not checked?
Assess facts, the work-related context, reasonable grounds at reporting, the chosen route and statutory conditions, including time since the breach ceased. The label does not determine protection. Clarify missing information safely and proportionately.