Ethics Newsline®

No one doubts that it takes real moral courage for leaders to hold firm under fire. Sometimes, however, it takes even greater courage to resign. Last Thursday both kinds of courage were in evidence. Here’s how the Washington Post for May 17 displayed the topic:

Lead story, page 1: U.S. attorney general Alberto Gonzales faces new revelations that as many as 26 of the nation’s 93 U.S. district attorneys were candidates for firings — not eight, as Mr. Gonzales had testified earlier. He clings to his post.

Second lead, page 1: World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz insists that he will not leave unless the bank’s board exonerates him of some of the ethics charges against him. He clings to his post.

Bottom right, page 1: The controversial head of the Smithsonian Business Ventures, Gary Beers, comes under strong fire amid investigations into his expenses, management, and relations with a female subordinate. He resigns.

Lead story, Business section: Micah Green, the co-chief executive of Wall Street’s largest trade association, the Security Industry and Financial Markets Association, was subject to an internal investigation that revealed significant management failures on his watch. Several months ago he resigned.

Score: Two staying, two leaving — though by day’s end Mr. Wolfowitz also had exited his post. And that was only one day in one newspaper. What do we learn from all of this?

It may sound odd to talk of moral courage in the face of deceptions, mismanagement, favoritism, and misappropriation of funds. But what if the charges are at worst trumped up, or at best overstated and miscast? When a leader stands firm in the face of unethical headwinds, we have no hesitation in applying the word moral to his or her fortitude.

The harder case is the obverse. Suppose the charges are accurate and the leader really is acting unethically. In that situation, some leaders stonewall to the bitter end, braving even impeachment rather than admitting their mistakes. Others bow out more quickly and gracefully. Of the two courses, which is more ethical? Surely the latter. It takes greater moral courage to admit mistakes and take the punishment than to cling to a lie out of vanity, self-deception, or the slender hope of getting off on a technicality. Sticking doggedly to deceit is stubbornness, not courage. Stepping aside, even when you’re in the wrong, shows a measure of selflessness. It suggests a willingness to put the good of the entire organization ahead of your own personal satisfaction. I’d call that a moral act any day, even when performed by an immoral actor.

But what happens when, as at the World Bank, the situation is murky? Was this really about the ethics of Mr. Wolfowitz’s promotion of Shaha Riza, the female World Bank executive who was his close companion? Or was it, as the after-the-fact reporting seems to indicate, a clashing of management styles so profound that he was unable to lead effectively? What if, as seems likely, the ethics charges were technically valid though not, in ordinary circumstances, terminable offenses? What if the real issue was a collapse of trust that rendered him ineffective and the institution leaderless?

When leaders go that far off course and lose that much trust, no amount of bluster, intimidation, or recrimination will swing the issue back to the moral side of the ledger. The leader who, fighting ever-mounting opposition from his or her constituents, bulls ahead without regard for the welfare of the organization may do far more long-term damage than the leader who is caring enough to put the organization first. At that point, the courageous leader steps aside — even though the legal or ethical case remains ambiguous.

And at that point, courageous boards may have to compromise in order to help the leader resign. That, too, may sound odd. When a board has been handed an investigative report clearly concluding that the leader acted unethically, as was the case at the World Bank, is compromise an act of courage? Or is it mere capitulation? In this case, the World Bank board accepted Mr. Wolfowitz’s contention that his mistakes were made in good faith, despite investigative findings to the contrary. On that grace note, he departed.

Cynics may sneer that the board’s action rose no higher than a Machiavellian ends-justifies-the-means philosophy. In fact, it may be that this board found a way to turn its dilemma into a trilemma — and had the wit to reach a compromise for the good of the whole organization. Boards, too, need to have the moral courage to surrender what they can’t always stubbornly demand.

©2007 Institute for Global Ethics

“I have a sense that when we finish our investigation, we may have a conclusion of the tenure of the attorney general.”

– Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), predicting the resignation of U.S. attorney general Alberto Gonzales last week as investigations continue into his leadership of the Justice Department. Six Republicans and a host of Democrats have called on Gonzales to resign after four months of deepening scandal over his handling of the firings of U.S. attorneys.

Gonzales’s problems continued to grow last week with the testimony of former Justice Department deputy attorney general James Comey. Comey testified that in 2004, Gonzales, then serving as White House counsel, tried to pressure then-attorney general John Ashcroft, recovering at the time in intensive care after surgery, into reauthorizing a terrorism surveillance program determined to be illegal by the Justice Department.

Two senators have called for a no-confidence vote in Gonzales this week, notes the Washington Post.

NEW YORK
In a case that some critics argue goes to the heart of governance issues at the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz last week announced his resignation as president of the powerful international development institution, planning to step down in June in the aftermath of an ethics scandal.

The Financial Times reports that Wolfowitz’s departure became all but inevitable after an ad-hoc committee of bank directors issued a devastating report about his handling of a compensation package for Shaha Riza, a bank official under his supervision with whom he was romantically involved.

Wolfowitz argued that he had cleared his involvement in the compensation negotiations with the World Bank’s ethics committee and followed its sketchy advice.

Wolfowitz and many of his supporters claimed that the chorus for his resignation was part of an orchestrated plan of character assassination, reports the CBS News media analysis column “Public Eye.”

The ad-hoc investigative board admitted that the bank’s ethics review system “did not prove robust” and that many people contributed to the incident.

But as the Economist reports, in the end the directors of the World Bank concluded that Wolfowitz had fallen short of the ethical standards of his office.

Moreover, the scandal eclipsed all of the Bank’s other efforts and made it impossible for Wolfowitz to lead the institution, reports the Economist.

A report from the BBC notes that Wolfowitz, who came into his post with an anticorruption agenda, was unpopular from the start among many Europeans because of his background at the Pentagon, where he was an architect of U.S. Iraq War policy. In the aftermath of his planned departure, some Europeans may seek to alter the arrangement for handling leadership of the world’s leading development agencies: The World Bank president regularly has been appointed by the U.S. government, while Europeans traditionally nominate the head of the International Monetary Fund.

Several leaders in the international development community also have called for more transparency in World Bank governance, and are planning to use Wolfowitz’s departure as a springboard for that agenda, according to the BBC.

LONDON
After a debate about both tactical and ethical issues, military leaders in Britain last week decided that Prince Harry will not see duty in Iraq.

Britain’s Ministry of Defense originally had slated the 22-year-old to serve as a reconnaissance leader in Iraq, with 11 men under his command, but top brass reversed that decision, saying the prince would be a valuable target to insurgents, reports the Yorkshire Post.

In addition to “specific threats” to Prince Harry, who is third in line for the throne, military leaders were swayed by the ethical dilemma of placing his fellow troops in harm’s way because he would be such a compelling target, notes the Scotsman.

Prince Harry is reported to be disappointed by the decision but plans to continue his military career, at least for the time being.

Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, who initially said the prince would go to Iraq but then changed his mind, put part of the blame on the media. “It is a fact that this close scrutiny has exacerbated the situation and this is something that I wish to avoid in future,” he told the Times of London.

In a related story, Prince Harry has been advised not to join his men for visits to London nightclubs, reports UPI, which quotes a source as saying the prince has been told “the public would find it unacceptable to see pictures of him drunk outside nightclubs during the six months his men are away fighting.”

WASHINGTON
The busy intersection of technology and ethics was the venue for several collisions of values last week:

• At least 25 nations block websites for political or social reasons, according to a new report. A survey by a group called the OpenNet Initiative finds that levels of censorship are higher than expected and are a sign that the Internet has matured to the point that governments are taking serious notice, reports the Washington Post. China, Iran, Myanmar, Syria, Tunisia, and Vietnam had the most repressive political filtering, according to the Post report. Iran, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen had the strictest filtering practices based on social and cultural taboos, blocking pornography, gambling, and gay and lesbian sites.
• Popular websites such as MySpace, MTV, and YouTube no longer are available on U.S. military computers after the Pentagon blocked access to the sites. While the Pentagon says the blockage is purely an attempt to save bandwidth, some observers say the action is partly an attempt to keep purposeful or inadvertent security breaches off the sites. Critics, such as Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House subcommittee on telecommunications and the Internet, called on the military to reverse the decision, claiming that the sites were used by troops to communicate with family and friends and were essential for morale, reports the Reuters news agency.
• The social-networking website MySpace is caught up in a legal and ethical dispute over whether it should release to state authorities the names of registered sex offenders who have used the site. MySpace has shut down portions of the site operated by convicted sexual predators, but so far has refused to turn over names to state officials who asked for them, citing federal privacy law. Pennsylvania attorney general Tom Corbett, one of the leaders of the effort by several state law enforcement agencies to obtain the names, tells Pittsburgh news-radio station KDKA that while MySpace acted properly in taking down the sites, he is disturbed by the firm’s reluctance to turn over the names, saying the states are legally entitled to the information.

Editor’s note: On Monday, MySpace released a statement saying it would provide information on sex offenders to the states. The company said its previous opposition was due to its belief that under federal privacy law, it could not supply the information without specific warrants, reports the New York Times. “We wanted to make sure that each state got the information through a legal process that allowed them to use it to prosecute and lock up these sexual predators. The last thing we wanted was for one of these predators to get off on a technicality,” said Mike Angus, executive vice president and general counsel for Fox Interactive Media, the parent company of MySpace.

OTTAWA
A current officer and a former ethics adviser to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) say the elite force has a culture of covering up crooked behavior or corruption.

Canada’s National Post reports that staff sergeant Andre Girard told a panel investigating alleged RCMP pension irregularities that he personally had been the target of retribution within the force due to his official actions looking into the matter.

Girard said the force is rampant with “institutional protectionism, anything to protect the image of the organization, sometimes at all costs,” according to the Post.

At the same hearing, John Spice, a former ethics adviser, said he was told by a former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli that he was making too much noise about alleged mismanagement in the pension fund and should back off, CTV reports.

Spice, who retired as an assistant commissioner in charge of the force’s ethical matters, told the panel that the RCMP is riddled with abuse of power and harassment, with officers and employees terrified of retribution for reporting wrongdoing, according to a report from the CBC.

“We should have had zero tolerance for any sorts of unethical behavior and, quite frankly, as much as I would like to say that we tried, we failed miserably,” he said, according to the Toronto Star.

Spice recommended that lawmakers establish an independent ombudsman to assure that complaints can be heard.

The panel is probing allegations of misspending of millions of dollars from the RCMP pension fund, widespread nepotism among fund administrators, and a cover-up that included threats of retaliation against whistleblowers.

WASHINGTON
The ethical issues behind political debates figured in stories last week involving the complex web of rights and obligations involved in the political process:

• Immigration reform proposed by the U.S. Senate is at the center of ethical and political controversy as advocates and detractors debate the moral implications of offering illegal immigrants what some characterize as amnesty. The plan would give illegal immigrants the chance for permanent residency after an eight-year waiting period, payment of fines, steady employment, and maintaining a clean criminal record, according to Bloomberg. In his weekly radio broadcast, President Bush denied that the measure constitutes an amnesty, saying it does not reward workers who broke the law to gain employment in the United States. In addition to criticism by some Republicans, who claim the measure is a disguised amnesty, ABC News reports that some Democrats say the measure is too tough on immigrants and labor unions say the proposal could drive down wages.
• House leaders last week worked on major elements of a lobbying-reform bill that is seen as a test of whether House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) can follow through on her pledge to bring greater transparency to Congress, now led by a Democratic majority. The Washington Post reports that the major issues under discussion include stricter guidelines on campaign contributions from lobbyists, disclosure of lobbyist involvement in “grassroots” letter-writing campaigns, and the amount of time mandated between a lawmaker’s departure from Congress and their employment as a lobbyist.
• The Associated Press reports that ethics issues surrounding the relationship of business and government are complicating the campaign of U.S. presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani. AP writers Sharon Theimer and Devlin Barrett report: “As a partner in a law and lobbying firm, Rudy Giuliani has profited from his firm’s work representing corporate clients before nearly every Cabinet department, exposing himself to a wide range of potential ethical entanglements. If Giuliani became president, his administration would be on the receiving end of regulatory requests, contract bids and policy proposals by the same clients of his Houston firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, that have contributed toward his personal net worth of millions of dollars.” While many leaders in government who have come from business backgrounds have recused themselves in advance from addressing items that would pose a conflict of interest, it is “unheard of for a president, when taking office, to promise to step away from a particular issue,” they write.

VARIOUS DATELINES
Corruption probes figured in world headlines last week in various incarnations: as carrots for economic advancement and as sticks to beat down political opposition. Among the stories:

• The head of Bangladesh’s anticorruption commission urged an all-out war against graft, which is seen as an anchor on the economic buoyancy of the nation. “Raise your voice whenever you see any unethical or illegal activities…. An inactive civil society is enough for destroying the entire society,” said Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury, according to the Bangladesh Daily Star.
• Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister of Pakistan who fled the country ahead of corruption charges, appears likely to remain in self-imposed exile. The Christian Science Monitor reports that a deal between Bhutto and Pakistan’s current leader, Pervez Musharraf, appears dead. It had been rumored that Musharraf would allow charges to be dropped against Bhutto, allowing her to return and heading off a growing political crisis. But Monitor correspondent Suzanna Koster reports that while the deal could have produced a politically pragmatic partnership, with the popular Bhutto lending a patina of democratic reform to Musharraf’s military-backed government and possibly defusing opposition, Bhutto has indicated that she does not trust Musharraf.
• The wife of former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra pleaded not guilty last week to tax evasion charges, according to reports from CNN and the Bangkok Post. Thaksin was deposed after corruption allegations and is now in exile in Europe. The case carries considerable political baggage because if Thaksin’s wife is found innocent, it would undermine the arguments of the military leaders who overthrew him in a bloodless coup, claiming Thaksin had presided over widespread corruption.
• China once again is trumpeting its crackdown on graft, with the Communist Party taking new steps to prosecute corrupt officials. Reuters and the Shanghai Daily report that the latest strategy involves greater scrutiny of promotions in the official bureaucracy because, the party admits, antigraft efforts are hampered by a system in which high officials and judges are themselves corrupt.
• Nigerian authorities fired three judges and 22 magistrates on corruption charges last week, according to the Vanguard of Lagos. Nigeria has instituted reform in the wake of widespread dissatisfaction with the justice system because of allegations of corruption and massive backlogs. Among the reforms are mandatory time frames for hearing cases and what officials call a general “sanitizing” of the judicial system.
• Former French president Jacques Chirac, whose term ended last week, plans to devote himself to fighting global warming and poverty — unless, reports the Agence France-Presse, he winds up consumed by the many corruption allegations that have dogged him since his days as mayor of Paris. Sources tell the AFP that Chirac is likely to face questioning in a probe into an alleged kickback scheme involving workers for Chirac’s former party. By law, presidents in France are granted immunity from prosecution until one month after they leave office.
• The European Union is monitoring a large-scale corruption scandal in Bulgaria, according to the Sofia News Agency. The issue, which involves the suspension of some high-level government officials, is particularly sensitive for Bulgaria, which recently was admitted to the European Union after orchestrating a highly visible anticorruption campaign designed to overcome EU resistance amid concerns about corruption and organized crime. Bulgaria essentially is on probation while the EU monitors progress in what is a high-stakes relationship: The country receives hundreds of millions of dollars from the EU.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.
Harvard University last week approved a new general-education curriculum that includes a course in ethical reasoning.

The revision of the curriculum — the first in three decades — also requires courses in critical skills, mathematical reasoning, science, politics, and a course devoted to “culture and belief to develop an understanding of and appreciation for traditions and culture and belief in human societies,” according to the Boston Globe.

Harvard’s decision was years in the making and involved sometimes chaotic and acrimonious debate, including a highly publicized decision to drop a religion-education requirement, the Harvard Crimson reports.

According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Harvard’s actions are watched closely because its curricular decisions often set a trend for other institutions.

MANCHESTER, England
A man who wants to be the first amputee runner to compete in the Olympics is at the center of an ethical controversy over whether his prosthetics actually give him an unfair advantage, according to a report from the New York Times.

Oscar Pistorius had both legs amputated below the knee when he was an infant, a result of a disabling deformity. He runs with the assistance of two J-shaped blades made of carbon fiber, and already has won races against non-amputee runners in an international competition.

At issue, reports Times writer Jeré Longman, is whether Pistorius’s high-tech prosthetics are an “equalizer or an edge.”

Longman writes that Pistorius is “a searing talent who has begun erasing the lines between abled and disabled, raising philosophical questions: What should an athlete look like? Where should limits be placed on technology to balance fair play with the right to compete? Would the nature of sport be altered if athletes using artificial limbs could run faster or jump higher than the best athletes using their natural limbs?”

Current regulations by track’s governing body, known by the initials IAFF and based in Monaco, prohibit technological aids such as springs and wheels. Elio Locatelli of Italy, an official of the agency, told the Times that external devices affect the purity of the sport and “next will be another device where people can fly with something on their back.”

From the Association of University Women Educational Foundation:

“New research released today by the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation shows that just one year out of college, women working full time already earn less than their male colleagues, even when they work in the same field. Ten years after graduation, the pay gap widens.

“In the report, Behind the Pay Gap, the AAUW Educational Foundation found that just one year after college graduation, women earn only 80 percent of what their male counterparts earn. Ten years after graduation, women fall further behind, earning only 69 percent of what men earn. Even after controlling for hours, occupation, parenthood, and other factors known to affect earnings, the research indicates that one-quarter of the pay gap remains unexplained and is likely due to sex discrimination. Over time, the unexplained portion of the pay gap grows.

“The research also shows that ten years after graduation, college-educated men working full time have more authority in the workplace than do their female counterparts. Men are more likely to be involved in hiring and firing, supervising others, and setting pay….

“The AAUW research also shows that this pay gap exists despite the fact that women outperform men in school — earning slightly higher GPAs than men in every college major, including science and mathematics….”

“You have to accept whatever comes, and the only important thing is that you meet it with the best you have to give.”

– Eleanor Roosevelt (U.S. humanitarian, writer, and wife of U.S. president Franklin Roosevelt, 1884-1962)