Proposed Interpretation to a Dilemma Faced Prime Minister - Essay Example

 Proposed Interpretation to a Dilemma Faced Prime Minister as a Matter of Justice Policy On Conflict Of Interest Pursuant to your request of an analysis of the situation where the Prime Minister is politically drawn with at present, please find be informed that this office views the problem as one involving conflict of Interest of which your office in the Ministry of Justice is bound to make a recommendation to the Prime Minister for the guidance of all concerned. 1. Problem Given the possibility that the Prime Minister may further his indirect financial interest by the election of her daughter to the highest corporate position of which the office of the Prime Minister has an influence to make, a conflict on interest is certainly at issue. 2. Background to the Problem It is reported in the papers and an contained in your memorandum addressed to the undersigned that the election of the Prime Minister’s daughter to chairpersonship corporation in the financial services industry, where the government of Canada partly owns, has generated too much controversy and the Prime Minister is being pressured by different groups to take action in the supposed chairpersonship of her daughter. Canada’s existing laws mandates government officials to avoid conflict on interest in the performance of function. Government offices are mandated to eliminate unethical behavior within their the sphere of their action or even the appearance of the appearance of unethical behavior, rather than the behavior itself, by keeping any ethical breaches hidden, instead of exposing and correcting them.1 3. Alternative Courses of Action Under the circumstances faced by the Prime Minister, this office has set out at least three for the minister to make an informed decision and intelligent, these may range from doing nothing (non-decisions are often important decisions) to some administrative response, to broader policy or legislative choices. The potential benefits and possible downsides for each particular course off action are discussed below for the information of the Prime Minister that may guide him in whatever choice of decision he is going to take. 3.1 Removal The Prime Minister may just cause the revocation of the appointment made to her daughter by instructing or influencing the board members who have a final say on the election of her daughter. The Prime Minister must remember that the position upon which appointment was made in favor of her daughter was not a confidential one under him for which the Prime Minister may find exemption under the existing laws of Canada. If the Prime Minister cannot avoid conflict on interest through revoking the appointment by his influence, the Prime Minister could still avail of some mitigation measure. This could be done by using the Prime Minister to cause the divestment of government investment in the said corporation. 3.2 Disclosure of Financial and other material interest of the daughter. Under existing regulations conflict of interest could be controlled by disclosing the extent to which decisions could be affected reason of having relatives in the office for which any public official may be involved with. It is a recognize principle in good business practice that disclosing the possible source of conflict of interest might at least prevent the instance of such public interest as the public is warned that the appointed daughter may not be inclined to enter into any contract that would redound to her personal interest. Thus the practice of requiring high-ranking government officials to disclose financial information on her assets such as stock, debts such as loans, and/or corporate positions held, typically annually or as required by existing rules may be appropriate in the case of the daughter of the Prime Minister. There is however doubt if the daughter could be required to make the disclosure since the same may not be a government official in the strict sense of the word The advantage is that the public is warned but doing this would also seem to authorize the daughter to enter into any contract that would favor her financial interest and that in the absence of the public making any objection to contract entered into favoring her interest, the disclosure has the effect of legitimizing a rather would-be prejudicial act. 3.3 Abstention in Board Members’ vote by Prime Minister’ Influence Cases of conflict of interest may entitle the involved official to abstain themselves from decisions where such a conflict exists. Theory however qualifies the conditions under which the option of for abstention may be availed off s depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute. To apply the principle of abstention in the case of the Prime Minister’s daughter, governing board of a said semi-government corporation where the said daughter got the position not from the shareholding of the Canada government where the Prime Minister has an influence, may still continue transaction normal business with the Prime Minister not minding contract entered into y said corporation. An exception may arise however where the daughter of the Prime Minister may benefit from a transaction that may entered into. The Prime Minister may therefore influence the members of the board by reason of Canada’s owning partly the corporation to abstain from voting on any issue that may involve the financial interest of the daughter’s interest in the corporation. The act is expected only to minimize any conflict because the board members appointed by the government should not participate in any way in the decision, including discussions. The downside of this option is that one may never know if the government will tend to gain than to lose more should the board members from the government said will not abstain. Abstention could connote lack of participation in major decisions of the corporation. 3.4 Doing Nothing For the Prime Minister to do nothing could be interpreted as utter neglect of office that could affect the political career of the Prime Minister while putting the state of Canada in bad light in the eyes of international business community. This is however with the benefit of avoiding the downside of the other options particularly their impracticality. 4. Recommendation Based on official assessment of the options available, this office recommends doing nothing the other options seems impractical since the government of Canada may actually benefit from the leadership of the Prime Ministers’ daughter as the issue may still be premature considering that there is actual proof that Prime Minister has actually benefited. Should her daughter manage the business successfully the government of Canada which is stockholder of the corporation will also benefits. Removal by influencing the government appointees to withdraw support for the Prime Minister’s daughter may not be sound with sufficient basis and self-defeating for the government. Disclosure may just be used to sidestep the bigger issue. Asking the government board members to abstain may also deprive the government appointees to participate fully in the management of the business 5. Implementation Since doing nothing could just be accomplished by inaction, the Secretary of Justice is will just have only to make an official statement to the media about the status of the law o the matter, hence technically there is not much cost to talk about. Work Cited: Kernaghan and Langford, “Conflict of Interest”, in The Responsible Public Servant, (Toronto:IRPP/IPAC, 1990) , page 134. Read More