An ethical approach over corruption as a potential solution

Opinion article by: Nicolas Botero Mejia (International Negotiator, Universidad EAFIT; and Analyst at the Trade, Investment and Development Observatory)

Colombia, among other Latin American countries have suffered for decades the negative consequences of corruption in different spheres. For instance, in politics, in the economic growth and in the social development. The kind of corruption that most affect a country usually is the one that political corporations and enterprises engage with. Although individuals might fall into daily unethical practices as well, the biggest concerns are those practices and behaviors happening in the public and the private sector that undermine social values and public morality. Governments had tried to confront this problematic by legal ways, promoting laws and regimes that forbid and sanction corrupt actions and actors. I don't have precise information over the real impact those regulations have had, probably not too well since corruption index and perception still high, but what I do recognize is the necessity to address this problem from another approach. Ethics and moral principles play an important role in this topic and I believe that should be considered to beat corruption with a structural social solution.

The purpose of this work is to address some desirable moral reflections that businessmen and employees as well as politicians and administrative authorities should contemplate not to incur in unethical and maybe illegal behaviors. After giving some background over moral principles, the basic essential concepts and its definitions, specific ideas will be presented. 

Every person has a moral code that contains principles, values, ideals and aspirations that shape our lives and determine the way we behave and relate with each other. The philosopher Richard Brandt suggest that when a principle is part of a person’s moral code, that person is strongly motived toward the conduct required by the principle, and against the ones that conflict with the principle. Nevertheless, there are two other concepts that could struggle with the moral principles and that usually do not depend on their choices or decisions because are given by the way they were raised and educated. On one side, conscience as the moral sense of right or wrong is disturbed when an internalized principle is violated. On the other hand, there is the self-interest orientation that every human unfortunately has. Collision of self-interest with moral principles are a usual cause for unethical actions because there is no guarantee that moral behavior will always benefit and satisfy a person's selfishness. 

There are some reflections that eventually can adjust politicians and businessmen's behaviors with the integrity that citizens expect. One of them is the acceptance of organizational norms and rules. No matter the nature of the organization, to achieve the objectives, members must commit themselves and in some cases, it implies resign some of their personal freedom. This means that both in an enterprise or in the Congress, the employees and members must follow rules and respect norms and assume that, consciously or unconsciously, for the pursuit of goals and correct performance of the functions. In the reality, some people think that their job, their social position or support gives the prerogative to skip rules and apply the Machiavellian idea of the goal justifying the means.

Accepting the norms established by an organization does not exclude the autonomy that sometimes the mentioned people should have. Since organizations and companies commonly exert pressure on their members, they tend to behave as those around them do. Imitating behaviors without realizing them is not desirable at all because that would perpetuate the wrong practices in certain manner and won’t allow new ideas and alternative courses of action to emerge. The bosses of a firm and the politicians, specially those elected by the population, must have a defined temperament and character to defend the interest of the company or of the voters.

In his book Business Ethics, Professor William Shaw names this objectionable phenomenon as Groupthink, and adds that “leads to irrational, sometimes disastrous decisions, and it has enormous potential for doing moral damage”.

It often happens that when a case of corruption is disclosed, no one of the people involved assumes the responsibility. Functions in an organization are frequently shared and coworkers use to join efforts towards a common objective which is a remarkable way to work coordinated. However, that collective participation can lead to a fragmented responsibility. That diffusion overwhelms personal moral responsibilities and make people think they are single small players with no important roles in a game that they cannot control. Looking forward to having respectful leaders that assume risks but also responsibilities when things does not end as expected is a must for a country that pretends to have transparent relations between government, private sector and civil society.

In conclusion, there are certain ethical and moral issues that could build a framework relative to those who participate in politics or run a business in order to promote integrity, rational and ethical decisions that influence the everyday life and could start a transformation towards an honored society. Legal system should not be totally banned from the regulation against corruption, the proposal of this work is another perspective that complements and seeks to prevent the necessary punishment that some actions deserve after attempting the general interests as corruption does. The way that the framework could be effectively replicated could follow the theory of the human-related collaborative sharing of knowledge, stated by Professor Johanna Lahtinen and that transferred knowledge based in qualitative feedback and empirical perceptions.

Reference

Shaw, W. (2011). Business Ethics: A textbook with cases. Boston, MA, USA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Decisiones y acciones: El proceso de construcción del futuro

Por: David Ricardo Murcia Sánchez
Docente de Cátedra
Investigador del Centro de Análisis Político
Analista del Observatorio en Comercio, Inversión y Desarrollo
Universidad EAFIT

En una inspiradora columna de opinión la profesora Maria-Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez llama la atención sobre la necesidad de pasar de las decisiones a las acciones (31 de Julio de 2016). Con ello evocando la dificultad que enfrenta el mundo contemporáneo de grandes pactos por el desarrollo, para enfrentar la subida del terrorismo expresado no sólo en las oleadas de violencia homicida en el mundo; también y, como correlato necesario, en las medidas de contingencia que muchos gobiernos están tomando para poder ofrecer seguridad a su ciudadanía, produciendo un giro a la derecha que atenta con las garantías ciudadanas que, al menos en Europa, se habían consolidado con el nuevo mileno. Con ello se levanta desde las tierras bajas del norte europeo (Holanda, Bélgica y Dinamarca) un populismo proteccionista y nacionalista que deja una sombra en el resto del Antiguo Continente, una sombra que sirve de aliciente, entre otros, al lepenismo francés (Meier, 08 de diciembre de 2015).

El problema surge en el contraste de las nuevas agendas de desarrollo que evoca la profesora Gonzalez-Perez, como los ODS (Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible), con su trabajo por construcción de un concepto universal de humanidad y de desarrollo conjunto y las tensiones políticas de la convivencia entre extraños. Ante un escenario así descrito, nos tomamos con una explicación clásica de la filosofía y ciencia políticas en la cual se plantea que debido a las diferencias insuperables que representas las unidades civilizacionales del mundo contemporáneo (Huntington, 1996), se producen choques que se comportan según la lógica de la deshumanización del enemigo político, produciendo un enemigo absoluto: aquel a quien no puedo resistir y tengo que acabar (Schwab, 1987). Dinámica cada vez más necesaria y agónica, en la media en que Europa se ha convertido en un crisol en el que chocan de manera constante Occidente y el Mundo Musulmán.

No obstante, esta explicación palidece en simplificaciones, no sólo sociológicas y politológicas, sino filosóficas y teóricas. Los vicios del primer orden se evidencian en cuanto este tipo de posturas unifican las voluntades políticas y culturales de amplios territorios en macro-conflictos que pueden perder de vista sucesos micro-sociales que expliquen la irrupción de la violencia: no se puede reproducir la tesis mediática de que los lobos solitarios, que se declaran radicales islámicos 15 u 8 días antes de sus actos, son expresiones claras de la confrontación cultural. El caso es claro con los perpetradores de los actos en La Florida y Niza, para quienes no hay manera clara de probar una vinculación prolongada con el denominado estado islámico. En el caso de la discoteca en Orlando, se presume que las causales del desafortunado incidente fueron más relacionadas con procesos psicológicos que con una guerra santa (ElPais.com.uy, 6 de julio de 2016).

Por otra parte, debemos considerar las flaquezas teóricas y filosóficas de suponer que ante el encuentro con el Otro sólo tengo como salida la confrontación beligerante y en caso extremo la exterminación. En principio, el teórico de lo político, Carl Schmitt, deja en claro que para la relación política con el Otro no es necesaria la existencia fenoménica de la guerra, sólo su posibilidad lógica (2009). En otras palabras, para la existencia de lo político la relación con lo ajeno del otro implica la posibilidad de enfrentarse con él en la guerra, pero sólo como momento último y agónico de la yuxtaposición de las dos afirmaciones exigencias colectivas; como lo deja en claro Jerónimo Molina (2016), en su revisión de la obra de Julien Freund.

Otro aspecto a tener en cuenta es que, más allá de las teorías políticas del enemigo, la filosófica política contemporánea ha buscado un cambio discursivo entre la otredad y la alteridad. En el primer caso el otro es aquel que me afirma en cuanto no soy, ni puedo ser él: una afirmación de la unidad política mediante la diferencia. En el segundo caso, la alteridad implica el proceso de construcción de una nueva unidad dinamizada por la unión de los contrarios en una nueva existencia: afirmación por complementariedad (Reinhard, 2010).

En este tránsito discursivo para poder pensar un relacionamiento político entre contrarios, puede llegar a caerse, como indica Kenneth Reinhard (2010), en una negación de la otredad, esto quiere decir del enemigo, como expresión de lo político. Así, filósofos como Badiou (2004) o Rosenzwieg (1985) pueden negarse a aceptar la posibilidad real y dolorosa de la enemistad absoluta. Pero con ello no proscriben la violencia del mundo. El atinente escrito de Reinhard (2010), muestra esta eterna doble posibilidad en su mayor crudeza, las relaciones políticas pueden construirse de forma diferenciada: otredad, o de forma complementaria: alteridad, según sea la capacidad del sujeto, en este caso sujeto político de vincularse con la realidad: trauma-represión o liberación-generación respectivamente. En punto último, es una decisión de los sujetos políticos tanto individuales como colectivos, que se perfora en dinámicas sociales de manera in-mediata, que no automática[1].

En este punto aparece de nuevo la necesidad que proyectaba la profesora Gonzalez-Perez de pasar de la decisión a la acción (31 de Julio de 2016). De pasar de planes para la construcción de una buena convivencia, a la generación de dinámicas que la realicen. Proceso en que el individuo, debe realizar una concientización de Otro como complemento a su existencia desde la diferencia y no una reproducción de discursos absolutos y oblicuos que satanicen la otredad.

Enfrentamos una disyuntiva que se renueva constantemente, como en su época lo dijo José Medina Echeverría (1976), que se suscita por cómo queremos vivir y se detona la respuesta a qué estamos dispuestos a hacer para construir un mejor escenario de futuro. 

Referencias

Badiou, A. (2004) Theoretical writings. New York: Continuum.

ElPais.com.uy. (6 de julio de 2016). Omar Mateen a su esposa: "Soy gay, me odio, por eso estoy haciendo esto". Disponible en: http://bit.ly/29otIsv.

Gónzalez-Pérez, M. A. (31 de Julio de 2016). Avances y reversas en los procesos de humanización: De las decisiones a las acciones. Dinero.co. Disponible en: http://bit.ly/2atUpfJ.

Huntington, S. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-81164-2

Medina Echeverría, J. (1976). Latin America in the possible scenarios of Détente. CEPAL REVIEW, second half of 1976, 9-92.

Meier, B. (31 de Julio de 2016). Europa: los efectos del giro a la derecha. Dw.com. Disponible en: http://bit.ly/2am5AIo.

Molina, J. (2016). Julien Freund o la imaginación del desastre. Nueva Revista de política, cultura y arte, (158), 221-232.

Reinhard, K. (2010). Hacia una teología política del prójimo. En K. Reinhard, E. L. Santner y S, Zizek. El prójimo. Tres indagaciones en teología política (21-103). Buenos Aires: Amorrortu.

Rosenzweig, F. (1985). The star of redemption (W. Hallo, Trad.). Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.

Schmitt, C. (2009). El Concepto de lo político. Texto de 1932 con un prólogo y tres corolarios. Madrid: alianza.

Schwab, G. (1987). Enemy or foe: A conflict of modern politics. Telos, (72), 194-201.

---

[1] La necesidad de diferenciar entre la automaticidad y la inmediatez se genera porque la primera noción implica una acción dispuesta a continuar, sin proceso ninguno que la detone más allá del original. Por otro lado, la inmediatez refiere a un fenómeno generado por la interacción entre dos partes que no refleja medio de transmisión tangible.

International cooperation for corruption and tax havens: an obstacle in the way to reach the Sustainable Development Goals

Opinion article by: Maria Isabel Aguilar Goez *

Student of Law (Universidad EAFIT)

The collaboration of different subjects and actors in the international context is perceived as a useful tool to acquire all kinds of interests that can vary depending on the objectives of those actors. A recent event showed a cooperation that certainly obeys to the interest of a group and at the same time damages the interests of others. In this short article, the incident will be explained together with the influence that it has in the international community and how trough The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) the reasons that produce such a happening can be confronted.

Clearly, the Panama Papers have caused a global feeling of repulsion to corruption, the fact that such a happening exploded recently involving public figures, has risen a concern in the international community society about tax heavens. According to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the brother-in-law of China’s president, the children of Pakistan’s prime minister, the cousins of Syria’s dictator, the late father of David Cameron, Britain’s prime minister and also friends of Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, all of them, did business with Mossack Fonseca, the law firm established in Panama that stands in the eye of the storm. The leak also provides details about the hidden financial dealings of 128 more politicians and public officials around the world and the cache of 11.5 million records shows how a global industry of law firms and big banks sells financial secrecy to politicians, fraudsters and drug traffickers as well as billionaires, celebrities and sports stars, says the ICIJ.

It is not the first time that the international cooperation that shall be implemented for poverty, climate change and many causes is used in the wrong way, more specifically for corruption. This problem is all over the world making it poorer, less equal and is willing to keep it in that way “When politicians steal, they reduce the amount of public cash left over for roads or schools. When they give sweetheart contracts to their chums, they defraud taxpayers and deter honest firms from investing in their country. All this hobbles growth” (The Economist, 2016).

Surprisingly, a cooperative initiative was made in another sector as well, the ICIJ labels it as “the largest media collaboration ever undertaken” because it involved journalists working in more than 25 languages who “dug into Mossack Fonseca’s inner workings and traced the secret dealings of the law firm’s customers around the world. They shared information and hunted down leads generated by the leaked files using corporate filings, property records, financial disclosures, court documents and interviews with money laundering experts and law-enforcement officials” in the words of the Consortium.

Due to the undeniable intercommunication trough social media, the civil society from countries all over the globe, and also the governments pointed at the need of more regulation in the financial sector, such a measure is essential to progress on the Sustainable Development Goals. These objectives draw the guidelines to how we want to be at 2030, they are an integration but the ones that could help to prevent and fight for this kind of problems is the SDG number 10 that establishes the need of reduction of inequality and the SDG number 16 that talks about the importance of strong and transparent institutions in the process to obtain peace and justice.

The Sustainable Development Goal number ten aims to reduce inequality and it is evident that the goal is directly affected by tax shelters, however what some of its targets suggest could be very effective to fight this problematic issue First, the governments must ensure equal opportunities and should also reduce inequalities of outcome, including eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard. Second, fiscal, wage and social protection policies shall be adopted to progressively achieve greater equality, and third improve the regulation and monitoring of global financial markets and institutions and strengthen the implementation of such regulations (United Nations, 2015). In addition to this, it is also relevant to promote a transparency culture, since the globalization constitutes an undeniable fact it is necessary to promote a significant change in the minds of the society to not use this kinds of tools to protect their money. It is often that people with a higher income who live in financially unstable countries are tempted to consume the tax heavens services, under the believing of protecting their money but offshore companies are also used to evade taxes and hide illicit wealth.

Regarding to the SDG number 16 the governments should face this problem since they are obviously and directly affected by this issue. This goal establishes how important is to create and reform the institutions in order to make them transparent, effective and capable of developing trust in the citizens trough the promotion of inclusive societies and providing access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels (United Nations, 2015). Besides , the interconnection between the goals is what makes them so special, to achieve this two goals, first there must be education, promotion of a honesty culture and total repulsion for such acts, the corruption problematic can low any progress made by a nation and discourages the people for the change and convince them that such a thing as the global society action and power doesn’t exist, when it is completely the opposite and the people needs to realize about this and, how the GG number 17 says, alliances for sustainable development must be created, because nothing is stronger than unity.

References

The Economist. (2016). The lesson of the Panama papers: More should be done to make offshore tax havens less murky, Apr 9th 2016, Available at: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21696532-more-should-be-done-make-offshore-tax-havens-less-murky-lesson-panama-papers

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalist. (2016). Giant Leak of Offshore Financial Records Exposes Global Array of Crime and Corruption: Millions of documents show heads of state, criminals and celebrities using secret hideaways in tax havens. Available at: https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160403-panama-papers-global-overview.html

United Nations. (2015). United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/