Ethical Concerns and Dilemmas in Government — Ethical Framework

Ethical Framework

Use a seven-step decision structure.

1
Classify the problem. — Distinguish a genuine value conflict from a factual uncertainty, routine decision or temptation to misconduct.
2
Establish facts. — Record what is known, what remains uncertain and what needs urgent verification. A preliminary allegation is not a final finding.
3
Check authority. — Identify duties, powers and constraints. Do not invent an emergency exemption merely because the objective is sympathetic.
4
Map claims. — State the legitimate interests of affected people, including less visible groups. A reputational concern need not carry the same weight as safety or a legal duty.
5
Compare options. — Examine consequences, rights, fairness, reversibility and feasibility. Test whether a lawful intermediate arrangement reduces the conflict.
6
Choose and act. — Explain the strongest objection to the preferred option and the safeguard addressing it. Assign responsibility and sequence.
7
Review. — Communicate reasons, preserve evidence and identify what would trigger correction.

CCS Rule 3's written-direction provisions support clarity for covered employees, but a written instruction does not legalise wrongdoing. RTI Act, 2005, section 10 illustrates how separable non-exempt information can sometimes reduce a disclosure conflict.

Avoid false dilemmas. Immediate closure and unconditional continuation may not exhaust the lawful options in a safety case. Equally, a compromise is not defensible if it leaves a serious risk unaddressed. The option must fit the facts and authority.