Indian external affairs minister Mrs. Sushma Swaraj issued a no-objection statement to clear the travel documents of Mr. Lalit Modi, who is considered a fugitive in a financial irregularities case. This has created a lot of controversy and political turmoil. Now the name of the current chief minister of Rajasthan Vasundhara Raje Scindia also surfaced in this controversy as it seems that she wrote a confidential letter in support of the immigration application of Lalit Modi. Both these people occupied some constitutional posts, Mrs. Swaraj wrote that note as an external affairs minister and Mrs. Scindia was the leader of the opposition of the Rajasthan state assembly when she wrote that letter. This whole controversy is because of the legal troubles of Mr. Lalit Modi in India, he is supposed to face an inquiry about some money laundering scam related to the cash-rich cricket tournament IPL, but instead of that, he escaped from the country and now living in London. Both Mrs. Swaraj and Scindia have very close ties with Mr. Lalit Modi, they both personally know him, and some of their close family members are directly or indirectly associated with him in a professional capacity. Mrs. Swaraj is claiming that she helped him on humanitarian grounds. It seems that Lalit needed those travel documents so that he could be with his wife who was undergoing some treatment related to cancer in Portugal. Whereas Mrs. Scindia still has not clarified whether she issued any such letter or not. Both these cases are ideal examples of conflict of interest. Conflict of interest is a big deal in all developed countries where one has to disclose any conflict of interest as part of a compliance requirement. Even in research, I remember that we need to sign a conflict of interest form declaring that we don't have any interests which can create any conflict in our research work, if there is any such thing, then we have to declare it so that concerned authorities know about it in advance, failure to do so can have some serious professional and legal consequences.
So, what is this conflict of interest that is given so much importance? Actually, it is a very simple thing to understand, if there is anything (especially any financial or personal interest) that can affect your professional behavior, then it should be properly disclosed before engaging in that professional activity. I can cite some examples based on my personal experience; for example, if I am acting as a judge in my city's school science fair and there are projects from the same school or same grade in which my kids study or projects by kids who I know personally (like my friend's or neighbor's kids), then I have to disclose this, so the organizers know about it. Most probably, they might want me not to judge those projects as there is a conflict of interest from my side. But even after this disclosure, if they want me to judge those projects then I must impartially judge them, but I need to disclose the conflict first. If I don't do that, then no matter how much I claim to be impartial, people will question my intentions as I didn't disclose my conflict before proceeding with my actions. If I fail to disclose the conflict for whatever reason and it gets discovered after I finish my duty as science fair judge, then I give others the opportunity to question the impartiality of my actions, that is why it is better to disclose it beforehand. It is not only required because I might show some favoritism but because it can have a negative effect also, I might be extra strict with those students just because I might have unreasonably high expectations from students I know personally. This is why disclosure of conflict of interest becomes a very important matter.
When you put tobacco business people on a committee that is supposed to decide tobacco's impact on human health, how can you expect an impartial and unbiased opinion from them? At the same time, you cannot put an openly anti-tobacco activist for the same reason, both cannot be impartial due to their conflicts with the issue under discussion. These types of things will keep on happening in India unless people understand and follow the policy of declaring conflicts of interest. If these two political figures had followed some simple steps of declaring their relationship with Lalit Modi and stayed away from issues related to him, then there would not have been question marks on their intentions. Hope that people learn from these incidents and take care not to engage in similar activities in the future.
When you put tobacco business people on a committee that is supposed to decide tobacco's impact on human health, how can you expect an impartial and unbiased opinion from them? At the same time, you cannot put an openly anti-tobacco activist for the same reason, both cannot be impartial due to their conflicts with the issue under discussion. These types of things will keep on happening in India unless people understand and follow the policy of declaring conflicts of interest. If these two political figures had followed some simple steps of declaring their relationship with Lalit Modi and stayed away from issues related to him, then there would not have been question marks on their intentions. Hope that people learn from these incidents and take care not to engage in similar activities in the future.
Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.
[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]
No comments:
Post a Comment