At the foremost let me say that this article is inspired from events that unfold in the news with so regularity. to start with intergrity is as a value very loosely described and hence so warmly applied. So to say, There are individual explanantion of intergrity.
borrowing from the great Ramayana, a story is when Ratnarkar (Valmiki) was robbing people he thought he was doing it with integrity to protect his family from destitution. In some reason it was his karma as the lead of the family. when he later realised that his integrity had a moral angle he fell at Narad muni's feet to ask for forbearance for his sins.
A lot is similar in today world. A bank doing business for its client under solicited confidentiality is infact a valued service. but would be this high intergral position be in the nations good interest?. Should an Administrator who has discretionary powers to award a contract, has any fiduciary interest in Company bidding for contract. Can an Appeal Judge preside over a case where the junior judge(s) are related to him. Can a Officer or executive be romantically be involved in a junior whom he is suppose to supervise. Above all Can an Federal body every investigate cases of misfeasance against same authority, whom it reports to. All these situation bring to fore the condition where integrity is tested.
There is but a different side angle to this argument, As Integrity becomes more important in public offices. Newly anointed CIA Director David Petraeus had to resign over an alleged extra marital Affair with a junior. Though part of this could be blamed on media, the question remains as to why is a person so decorated (Gen. David Petraeus was Incharge of US Army Operations in Afghanistan for near a decade). had to resign over something that is more a personal misjudgement rather than operational misconduct. Here the different between individual interpretation of integrity. This though is a high moral ground that Gen. Petraeus has taken, many officer have been suprised that such proffessional person can be undone by some personal decision to go outside the line.
This though may be an isolated example, but it is significant as we have many examples where there is wanton disregard for integrity, what is very evidently collusion between 2 individuals to influence decision. It is what is called in corporate culture as "I scratch your back, You scratch mine".
Today one has to be very careful about the decision which will be tested on this ground. Loss of Intergrity is the most easiest charge to level and the hardest to repudiate. It would be improper not to mention about office of Profit, which is linked to almost all decision. It somehow amuses me the Indian parliament reaction to office of profit controversy. The Government has prepared a list of all position it can award under its discretion to people of its choosing. Major post of these are marked in the list as "not for Profit" under truly unimaginative reasoning. hence enabling ministers /Officials/ Parliamentarians to hold on to these position and still remain above law. Napolean once said, "If you like me, raise your hand or raise you standards." This activity is same just standards are revised on the south side.
Consider the following HYPOTHETICAL Scenario:-
A serving Minister of the Government is Chairman of Milk Producing & Marketing Co-operative, As a co-operative concern is not inclined to profit orientation, rather social dividends, this position is in "not for Profit" list. Now as Milk is a scheduled essential Commodity its prices are regulated by Government. i.e. to say only the cabinet can decide if people should pay more for milk.
Due to rising Input cost, The proposal to hike the milk rates substantially comes up for discussion in the cabinet. This Minister in question is now a member of this cabinet empowered committee. Its only a blinds man guess what the Minister should suggest?
Hence would it be fair that the minister excuse himself from such discussion. yes but there is a small thing what if everyone excused themselves, there would be no-one decide. ??
borrowing from the great Ramayana, a story is when Ratnarkar (Valmiki) was robbing people he thought he was doing it with integrity to protect his family from destitution. In some reason it was his karma as the lead of the family. when he later realised that his integrity had a moral angle he fell at Narad muni's feet to ask for forbearance for his sins.
A lot is similar in today world. A bank doing business for its client under solicited confidentiality is infact a valued service. but would be this high intergral position be in the nations good interest?. Should an Administrator who has discretionary powers to award a contract, has any fiduciary interest in Company bidding for contract. Can an Appeal Judge preside over a case where the junior judge(s) are related to him. Can a Officer or executive be romantically be involved in a junior whom he is suppose to supervise. Above all Can an Federal body every investigate cases of misfeasance against same authority, whom it reports to. All these situation bring to fore the condition where integrity is tested.
There is but a different side angle to this argument, As Integrity becomes more important in public offices. Newly anointed CIA Director David Petraeus had to resign over an alleged extra marital Affair with a junior. Though part of this could be blamed on media, the question remains as to why is a person so decorated (Gen. David Petraeus was Incharge of US Army Operations in Afghanistan for near a decade). had to resign over something that is more a personal misjudgement rather than operational misconduct. Here the different between individual interpretation of integrity. This though is a high moral ground that Gen. Petraeus has taken, many officer have been suprised that such proffessional person can be undone by some personal decision to go outside the line.
This though may be an isolated example, but it is significant as we have many examples where there is wanton disregard for integrity, what is very evidently collusion between 2 individuals to influence decision. It is what is called in corporate culture as "I scratch your back, You scratch mine".
Today one has to be very careful about the decision which will be tested on this ground. Loss of Intergrity is the most easiest charge to level and the hardest to repudiate. It would be improper not to mention about office of Profit, which is linked to almost all decision. It somehow amuses me the Indian parliament reaction to office of profit controversy. The Government has prepared a list of all position it can award under its discretion to people of its choosing. Major post of these are marked in the list as "not for Profit" under truly unimaginative reasoning. hence enabling ministers /Officials/ Parliamentarians to hold on to these position and still remain above law. Napolean once said, "If you like me, raise your hand or raise you standards." This activity is same just standards are revised on the south side.
Consider the following HYPOTHETICAL Scenario:-
A serving Minister of the Government is Chairman of Milk Producing & Marketing Co-operative, As a co-operative concern is not inclined to profit orientation, rather social dividends, this position is in "not for Profit" list. Now as Milk is a scheduled essential Commodity its prices are regulated by Government. i.e. to say only the cabinet can decide if people should pay more for milk.
Due to rising Input cost, The proposal to hike the milk rates substantially comes up for discussion in the cabinet. This Minister in question is now a member of this cabinet empowered committee. Its only a blinds man guess what the Minister should suggest?
Hence would it be fair that the minister excuse himself from such discussion. yes but there is a small thing what if everyone excused themselves, there would be no-one decide. ??
