General Studies Mains-2014 Paper-4 (Ethics and Integrity) Answer : Q-12
Suppose you are the CEO of a company that manufactures specialized electronic equipment used by a government department. You have submitted your bid for the supply of this equipment to the department. Both the quality and cost of your offer are better than those of the competitors. Yet the concerned officer is demanding a hefty bribe for approving the tender. Getting the order is important both for you and for your company. Not getting the order would mean closing a production line. It may also affect your own career. However, as a value-conscious person, you do not want to give bribe.
Valid arguments can be advanced both for giving the bribe and getting the order, and for refusing to pay the bribe and risking the loss of the order. What those arguments could be? Could there be any better way to get out of this dilemma? If so outline the main elements of this third way, pointing out its merits. 250 words.
Arguments for payment of bribe – A CEO’s duty first and foremost lies to his business house, and its business’ interest that he must try to protect at all costs. Closing of a whole production line affects the strategy and bottom line of a business. Hence, it is important for the CEO to secure the tender. Since the business’ quote is the lowest anyway, it would not be harmful to provide a bribe to get the company the tender that rightfully belongs with it.
Arguments for non-payment of bribe- Bribery is legally and ethically wrong. Companies that are found providing bribes can be blacklisted and barred from further contracts for public procurement. Also, the company and the CEO could both face legal action for providing bribe to obtain the tender.
The third way – the CEO must make it clear to the officer that he will not provide a bribe, and that he is willing to take the matter to the Courts and to the Vigilance Department if necessary. The CEO must take efforts to catch the concerned officer asking for bribe on tape, so that he can use that as leverage against him. If despite this, the officer awards the tender to some other business, the CEO can approach the Courts. Also, RTI can be used to force the department concerned to reveal the process according to which the tender was awarded. Thus, the irregularities will come to light and the process of awarding the tender will have to be started afresh, and the company can make a fresh bid.
