UPSC Ethics Simplified — Impartiality: the concept

Do you know a phrase in Latin Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum? It means “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.” Though today we are not discussing Justice per se, but we all believe that a civil servant has to practice the values of impartiality while discharging duties. But whether it is easy to be an unbiased person in decision making or to remain just? And do such persons make the civil service more resolved, robust, and consistent with impartiality? I hope so. And you will be agreeing with me without an iota of doubt.

Is it easy to be an impartial person? 

This is a valid question particularly when we see the human evolution and preference of Sapiens for their community and family members. It becomes more difficult when the journey of genes embarks on the family ship and relates well through face or voice similarities. Is it possible for a father to remain impartial or unbiased in conduct if he finds his daughter or son nearer to his personality or for a mother to find children an extension of their persona? “I am Daddy’s daughter or Mumma’s boy” creates a domino effect and averts a kind of epiphany across. We all have gone through and witnessed the same.

Now this kind of emotionally evolved generation qualifies for an exam like UPSC or any other exam and takes the chair for larger responsibilities. But simultaneously they have been influenced by certain kinds of feelings and Kohelberg’s last stage of reasoning can not be expected by everyone. A lot of times in a job one picks a few persons alike in terms of behavior or certain habits. There is nothing wrong to feel comfortable with those who are alike in thought but it is very important not to become unfavourable to others.

The Indian bureaucracy deals with a common man who quietly waits for that civil servant who loves to serve and share the benefit with an impartial or unbiased mindset. When one is partial, it means that personal liking and disliking will find favour in decision making and a biased mindset will favour one person or group over others. So here we can observe that anybody who is partial acts through a ‘favourite’ lens which pulls the decision making more towards the chosen one rather than everyone.

Impartiality is a qualitative value and expects the decision maker to be unbiased, and just. Here the civil servant treats the community as human beings and there is no space for favouritism. The feelings of cast, class, religion, benefits, and preferences have no space in the reasoning of such kinds of civil servants. It asserts treating all individuals or groups equally and without any internal or external influences. It’s a path that is more consistent with moral intent and moral reasoning. And don’t forget! Impartiality can only act if Integrity is acting as a root.

Impartiality and Integrity

Integrity is the quality of having uncluttered moral convictions and an iron will to abide by these in conduct at all levels and interactions in life. As we know well that the decision making or action of a public servant affects the welfare of a large number of people and also one has to deal with large amounts of public funds, it is important to have a high degree of integrity. Here nobody can be partial or biased.

And certainly, a person with impartial conduct creates an image of the highest form of integrity and can act as a role model and provide proper leadership which is always expected from public servants. Ultimately governance is nothing but public service. And this path of service can only remain green if the travellers remain integral to impartiality. Maybe you will find fewer walkers on this road so what? Robert Frost still whispers,

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

( The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost)

Express Input

Impartiality doesn’t mean neutrality

Kofi Annan while reflecting on the role of the Secretary General, in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York said:

“…I have persisted, because I must deal with the world not as I would wish it to be, but as it is. I must confront it with a sense of reality about how far a leader can be pushed by peaceful means and how long it will take to bring peace to a state of war. Does this make me, or anyone in my position, by definition morally blind? Can a Secretary-General not therefore tell good from evil or victim from aggressor?

Of course he can, and precisely for that reason he must persist, for it is ultimately the aggressor more often than the victim who will benefit from isolation and abandonment by the international community. Impartiality does not – and must not – mean neutrality in the face of evil; it means strict and unbiased adherence to the principles of the Charter – nothing more, and nothing less.“

Note: By ‘Charter’ Kofi Annan meant UN Charter.

(Source: un.org)

Points to ponder: 

1.How will you differentiate between neutrality and impartiality?

2.“Impartiality is not neutrality. It is partiality for justice.” – Stainlaw Jerzy Lec. What does this quote mean to you?

(Answer in the comment box or through your emails)

(The writer is the author of ‘Being Good and Aaiye, Insaan Banaen’. He teaches courses on and offers training in ethics, values and behaviour. He has been the expert/consultant to UPSC, SAARC countries, Civil services Academy, National Centre for Good Governance, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Competition Commission of India (CCI), etc. He has PhD in two disciplines and has been a Doctoral Fellow in Gandhian Studies from ICSSR. His second PhD is from IIT Delhi on Ethical Decision Making among Indian Bureaucrats. He writes for the UPSC Ethics Simplified (Concepts and Caselets) fortnightly.)