KiranMallu is a staunch supporter of a minister. He handlesthe mobilization of crowdsfor minister’s meetings. Naturally, the minister is dependent on him. Mallu is engaged by an industrialist as a consultant for getting a large piece of government land for a factory. Part of that land belongs to village pasture. The minister is bringing great pressure on officials to denotify the village pasture and hand it over to the industrialist.
What can be an appropriate reflection on the minister’s conduct?
1. Unless land is made available to industry, no economic progress is possible.
2. What the minister did is part of political dynamics and the way things happen in most democratic societies.
3. The minister’s action is wrong.
4. The ministers can make demands, and it is for civil servants to resist wrong demands.
As regards(1), a general statement about need of land for industry cannot justify minister’s conduct. Instead of giving away land in community use, other alternatives can be explored. Land allotment should be based on a policy and any allotment should fit into that policy.
The second view is also very general, and cannot be directly applied to this case. It is a very sweepingstatement which is inapplicable to manycontextsand societies.Nowadays, there is a great emphasis on governance and ethical ministerial conduct.
The minister is obviously in the wrong in many ways. First, he is supporting his political manager. Secondly, he is exerting undue pressure on officials. Ministers should not push government servants into improper actions. Thirdly, he is trying to subordinate public interest i.e. use of land for public purpose, to private interest i.e. use of land for a private factory.
The fourth view is rather perverse. The minister is a member of political executive which is supposed to provide leadership and moral guidance to administration. He will be utterly failing in this role if he goads officials into wrong doing. Though officials need to prevent irregular actions, they cannot be seen as moral custodians of ministers. We are examining the role of the minister as a moral agent and hence such an option, though it may not be far from truth, is not acceptable.
SARC’s Views on Code of Ethics for Ministers
The Code of Conduct is a minimum agenda for good behaviour. As such, it lists the undesirable forms of ministerial misconduct. It is not a Code of Ethics. It is, therefore, necessary that the Code of Conduct is supplemented by a Code of Ethics which can guide Ministers on how they should uphold the highest standards of constitutional and ethical conduct in the performance of their duties. According to SARC, the ethical code should be based on the overarching duty of Ministers to comply with the law, to uphold the administration of justice and to protect the integrity of public life. It should also lay down the principles of minister-civil servant relationship. The Code of Ethics should also reflect the seven principles of public life which the Nolan committee mentioned.
The SARC has recommended that a Code of Ethics and a Code of Conduct for Ministers should include the following:
(a) Ministers must uphold the highest ethical standards;
(b) Ministers must uphold the principle of collective responsibility;
(c) Ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies;
(d) Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or appears to arise, between their public duties and their private interests;
(e) Ministers in the Lok Sabha must keep separate their roles as Minister and constituency members;
(f) Ministers must not use government resources for party or political purposes; they must accept responsibility for decisions taken by them and not merely blame it on wrong advice;
(g) Ministersmust upholdthepoliticalimpartialityof theCivilServiceand not askcivil servants to act in any way, which would conflict with the duties and responsibilities of civil servants;
(h) Ministers must complywiththe requirements which the two Houses of Parliament lay down from time to time;
(i) Ministers must recognise that misuse of office or information they get to know violates their role as repositories of public trust;
(j) Ministers must ensure that public funds are used with utmost economy and care;
(k) Ministers must function in such a manner as to serve as instruments of good governance and to provide services for the betterment of the public at large and foster socio-economic development; and
(l) Ministers must act objectively, impartially, honestly, equitably, diligently and in a fair and just manner.
An annual report indicating violations of the Code by ministers should be submitted to the appropriate legislature for consideration. Besides, the present Code of Conduct is not in the public domain and, as a result, members of the public are perhaps not aware that such a code exists. SARC has recommended that the Code of Conduct for Ministers should be put in the public domain. Even in coalition set ups, the ministers from the coalition partners both at the Centre and the State should also adhere to the Code of Ethics/Conduct; and the Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers are duty bound to put violations of these Codes in public domain.
SARC Made the Following Recommendations on the Subject
(a) In addition to the existing Code of Conduct for Ministers, there should be a Code of Ethics on the above lines.
(b) The Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers should create units in their offices to monitor the observance of the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct.
(c) The Prime Minister or the Chief Minister should be duty-bound to ensure the observance of the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct by Ministers. This would be applicable even to coalition governments where the Ministers may belong to different parties.
(d) An annual report on observance of these Codes should be submitted to the appropriate legislature. This report should include specific cases of violations and the action taken thereon.
(e) The Code of Ethics should inter alia include broad principles of the minister-civil servant relationship and the Code of Conduct should stipulate the details outlined above.
(f) The Code of Ethics, the Code of Conduct and the annual report should be put in the public domain.
Summary
¤ In democracy, holders of political office are accountable to people.
¤ Those who hold power get it from the people; public functionaries are trustees of people.
¤ Trusteeship implies that the authority entrusted to the officials should be exercised in the best interest of the people or in ‘public interest’.
¤ Creating an ethical framework requires: codifying ethical norms and practices; mechanisms forenforcingtherelevant codes;andmeans ofdisqualifying apublicfunctionaryfromoffice.
¤ In this chapter ‘public functionary’ refers to ministers or those who hold political office not to government officials.
¤ Many nations and international bodies have evolved common ethical norms for those who hold high publicoffice.
¤ Nolan Committee’s ethical standards are part of such ethical norms for political office holders.
¤ These principles are: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. These principles of public life apply to political leaders and civil servants in anydemocracy.
¤ UN Convention against corruption expresses similar sentiments.
¤ Many Western democracies have prescribed codes of ethics for ministers.
¤ In India, codes of conduct exist for Central and State ministers.
¤ In general, they relate to declaration of properties, keeping an arm’s distance from their businesses, avoiding business dealings with government or its entities, preventing family or associates from misusing office, disassociating from fund collections, disallowing family members from accepting employment under foreign government, not accepting expensive gifts or lavish hospitality and making annual property declarations.
¤ The SARC has recommended a Code of Ethics and a Code of Conduct for Ministers. As we have given them in the form of short points, students can refer to them.
¤ Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers should create units in their offices to monitor the observance of the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct.
¤ The Code of Ethics, the Code of Conduct and the annual report on their observance should be put in the public domain.
PRACTICE QUESTIONS
1. What are the main provisions of the code of conduct for ministers?
2. What are the chief objectives which codes of conduct for ministers seek to achieve?
3. What are the chief elements in the code of ethics which SARC proposed for ministers?
4. Give some examples to illustrate violation of Codes of Conduct by ministers.
5. Give some examples to illustrate violations of Codes of Ethics.
6. Write short notes on: (a)objectivity; (b) Code of Ethics for Ministers; (c) integrity.
REFERENCES
Second Administrative reforms Commission Ethics in Governance (Fourth Report)
American Society for Public Administration Code of Ethics
UNESCO Ethics Office 60-Minutes
