UPSC MainsGENERAL-STUDIES-PAPER-IV202210 Marks150 Words
Q34.

What are the options available to you under the given situation?

How to Approach

This question is incomplete. It lacks a 'given situation'. To provide a meaningful answer, I will assume a common ethical dilemma faced by a civil servant – receiving a request from a politically influential person to bend rules in favour of their relative. The answer will outline options available, focusing on ethical principles, legal frameworks, and potential consequences. The structure will involve identifying the stakeholders, outlining possible courses of action, analyzing their pros and cons, and finally, recommending the most ethical and legally sound approach.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

Ethical dilemmas are inherent in public service, demanding careful consideration of competing values and principles. A civil servant often finds themselves navigating situations where personal integrity clashes with external pressures, particularly from those in positions of power. The core of ethical governance lies in upholding the rule of law, maintaining transparency, and acting in the public interest. This response addresses the options available to a civil servant facing undue influence, assuming the 'given situation' involves a request to favour a relative of a politically influential person, violating established procedures and principles of meritocracy.

Understanding the Situation and Stakeholders

The primary stakeholders in this scenario are the civil servant, the politically influential person, the relative seeking favour, the public, and the integrity of the institution. The core issue revolves around potential abuse of power, nepotism, and violation of principles of fairness and equal opportunity. The civil servant’s duty is to act impartially and in accordance with the law, irrespective of external pressures.

Options Available

  • Compliance with the Request: Favouring the relative by bending the rules.
  • Negotiation/Compromise: Attempting to find a middle ground that partially satisfies the request while minimizing the violation of rules.
  • Firm Refusal: Clearly and respectfully refusing the request, citing rules and regulations.
  • Reporting the Matter: Informing higher authorities (e.g., Vigilance Commission, Chief Secretary) about the undue influence attempt.
  • Seeking Guidance: Consulting with senior colleagues or ethical advisors within the organization.

Analysis of Options

Option Pros Cons Ethicality Legality
Compliance May temporarily appease the influential person. Compromises integrity, fosters corruption, harms public trust, sets a bad precedent. Highly unethical Illegal (violation of service rules, potential for criminal charges)
Negotiation May reduce the extent of rule-bending. Still compromises integrity, creates ambiguity, may be perceived as collusion. Questionable Potentially illegal, depending on the extent of compromise
Firm Refusal Upholds integrity, demonstrates commitment to ethical principles, protects the institution’s reputation. May lead to adverse consequences from the influential person (e.g., transfer, harassment). Highly ethical Legal
Reporting Ensures accountability, protects the institution, potentially prevents further wrongdoing. May face retaliation, requires courage and strong evidence. Highly ethical Legal (often mandated by rules)
Seeking Guidance Provides support and clarity, helps in making an informed decision. May delay action, relies on the availability and integrity of advisors. Ethical Legal

Recommended Course of Action

The most ethical and legally sound course of action is a firm refusal coupled with reporting the matter to higher authorities. The civil servant should politely but firmly explain to the influential person that complying with the request would violate established rules and principles of fairness. Simultaneously, a detailed report should be submitted to the appropriate authority (e.g., Vigilance Commission) outlining the attempt at undue influence. Seeking guidance from senior colleagues beforehand is also advisable.

Relevant Legal and Institutional Frameworks

  • Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964: These rules emphasize integrity, impartiality, and devotion to duty.
  • Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Addresses bribery and corruption in public service.
  • Whistleblower Protection Act, 2014: Provides protection to individuals reporting corruption.
  • CVC (Central Vigilance Commission): An independent body responsible for overseeing integrity in government.

Conclusion

Navigating ethical dilemmas requires courage, integrity, and a commitment to upholding the rule of law. While facing pressure from powerful individuals can be daunting, a civil servant’s primary duty is to the public and the institution they serve. A firm refusal, coupled with reporting the incident, not only protects the integrity of the system but also reinforces the principles of good governance and accountability. Strengthening ethical infrastructure and promoting a culture of transparency within the bureaucracy are crucial for preventing such situations in the future.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Nepotism
The practice of showing favouritism to relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.
Conflict of Interest
A situation in which a person has competing interests, potentially leading to biased decisions.

Key Statistics

According to the 2023 Global Corruption Perception Index, India ranks 85 out of 180 countries, indicating a moderate level of perceived corruption.

Source: Transparency International

As per the Annual Report of the Central Vigilance Commission (2022-23), over 12,000 complaints related to corruption were received.

Source: Central Vigilance Commission

Examples

Sanjiv Chaturvedi Case

IAS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi faced numerous transfers and harassment for exposing corruption in the Haryana Forest Department. His case highlights the challenges faced by whistleblowers in India.

Frequently Asked Questions

What if reporting the matter leads to retaliation?

The Whistleblower Protection Act, 2014, provides legal protection against retaliation for individuals reporting corruption. However, the effectiveness of this Act in practice remains a concern.