As I write my column each week, I sometimes pause to question: Do my confessions supply a valuable civic duty, or am I merely biting the hand that feeds me?

Opinions about whistle-blowing are polarized. Whistleblowers can be seen as selfless martyrs for the common good; others view them as “dobbers” or “snitches” solely pursuing personal admiration and fame. But while my LondonPaper columns harbor only the most honorable intentions, most of my City colleagues shy as far as possible from the career-sabotaging media spotlight.

Persecution of whistleblowers has been a serious issue in the City. Although the law protects whistleblowers from their mischievous banks, they have nevertheless been fired, suspended, and demoted. Many whistleblowers report there exists a widespread “shoot the messenger” mentality by banks accused of misconduct, and in some cases they have been subjected to criminal penalties.

The most recent City whistle-blowing fiasco involves Deutsche Bank’s Deepak Moorjani, as he valiantly disputes the bank’s creative definition of “risk.” Deutsche is accused of using sloppy methods in computing the fair value of asset-backed securities sold to institutional investors. The brokerage is suspected of flashing different market prices for the same securities depending on the client, among other transgressions.

This is serious because the market prices that banks quote have kind of a “domino effect,” used as reference prices for other businesses to value their own portfolios. Should there be a question in how security prices were calculated, this would impact not only the earnings of companies that bought these securities, but also normal investors.

With its far-reaching impact on the market, authorities are considering punishing the bank under the FSA’s Financial Instruments and Exchange Law. Moorjani’s claim holds potentially huge repercussions not only for Deutsche, but also Mark-To-Market methodologies, media relations with City banks, and the murky world of securitization.

But unfortunately, our crisis can’t be boiled down to a simple “miscalculation” problem. It is also an ethical problem. There has been a serious collapse of ethics at a corporate and individual level in the City, and until this is dealt with, we won't change a thing.

It’s quite rare to get the insight of whistleblowers crying over allegedly dishonest City practices (outside my column, that is.) The issues of moral hazard, “tweaking” security prices, and blatant "overbidding" with client money continue, and will continue until there is a decision on Mr. Moorjani's case.

We can only hope Mr. Moorjani’s hot air is taken seriously. But given the harsh anti-City spirit of the times, I’m relieved to think that whistle blowing has never been a more worthwhile endeavor.