Shashi Motilal - The Ethics of Governance: Moral Limits of Policy Decisions

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Does one give priority in vaccinations during a pandemic to the old who are no longer at work, since they are more vulnerable to dying than the young?, Or give priority to the youth, who may be less vulnerable, but have decades of productive life ahead of them, and have children to raise to adulthood?

Does one invest large-scale resources in a high-tech railway that would be used primarily by businesspersons and professionals who make a large economic contribution to society, and travel on this railway would save their productive time? Or does one invest the money in improving safety in accident-prone conventional railways that are used by much larger numbers of humble common-folk?

Does one build a large-dam, that would bring water and electricity to parched, unlit villages, which in turn would increase the incomes of poor farmers, and enable their children to be educated? Or does one refrain from building the dam because it would flood the ancestral home-land of even poorer tribals, decimate their culture, and put the survival of a number of unique species of plants, insects and animals at risk?

Does a tribe which believes that their gods reside on a particular mountain in their ancestral domain, which is a huge reserve of a valuable mineral, have the right to reject the admittedly generous offers of compensation by a corporate house for access to the deposits? Or does the strategic or economic importance of the mineral to broader society trump the faith of the tribe?

Does a social group that has been severely ostracized socially and exploited economically in past generations, have the right to preferential treatment in public education and employment, to the disadvantage of the descendants of their oppressors? Or can one argue that since these descendants have themselves committed no injustice they cannot be penalized? If the former, to what extent, and how long may such positive discrimination continue?

May scientists test new drugs and medical procedures intended for humans that may involve pain and suffering first on sentient, but helpless animals, such as dogs and rhesus monkeys, before testing them on informed, consenting human volunteers? Or should they only test on humans on the argument that suffering is suffering, and no distinction may be made between humans and sentient animals? And if they may do the former, what are the proper limits and safeguards?

Or, taking the dominant global issue of our times that bears on the future of human civilizationthat of man-made climate change. Must those who are poor because of colonial exploitation in the past give up all expectations for a less deprived future for several more generations, so that climate change can be mitigated, because those who have become rich and powerful through colonialism, and are mainly responsible for the problem, will not accept more modest living standards?

These are just a few among the challenges actually faced by policymakers in recent times. How does one resolve them? How does one begin to find solutions that are broadly acceptable, even to those who may lose thereby?

In a democracy, public debate over policy issues is not just inevitable. It is essentialin order to enable a consensus to emerge over what justice in a given situation requires. Further, unless people are convinced that a given course of action is just, they will block progress.

How exactly does one begin to understand what justice in a situation at hand demands? Of course, shared intuition is important; however, not everybody shares the same intuition. Where one stands, very often depends upon where one sits!

It is precisely in the removal of such mental fogs that public reason and analysis is important and necessary. Formal acquaintance with the principles and modes of analysis of issues of justice is thus part of the core of the knowledge system of the public servantwhether one is a legislator assenting to laws, a Minister in the Government making policies, or a civil servant presenting the pros and cons of policy options, and executing them once they are adopted. However, acquaintance with these principles and modes of analysis is also important for others who have more than a casual interest in public governancemedia persons, even lawyers and judgessince it is important that they appreciate why the legislature has framed the law as it is, or to interpret the law so that justice genuinely follows.

What exactly do public officials need to know by way of knowledge that is relevant to their responsibilities, apart from the minutiae of laws, rules, manuals? The question is very old. In the Valmiki Ramayana, King Janaka, the adoptive father of Sita is described as not only a brave king, but was as well versed in the Shastras and Vedas as any rishi, and was the beloved pupil of Yaajnavalkya whose exposition of the Brahnajnaana to him is the substance of Brihadaaranyakopanishad.