"Get new lawyers!"

In James Rubin's account of the Kosovo war, he describes an exchange between Secretary Albright and Robin Cook (the British Foreign Secretary). Cook was explaining that it is difficult for Britain to commit to the war without UN Security Council approval because the legal advice he had received was that such action would be illegal under international law. Albright's response was, simply, "get new lawyers". Rubin "credits" Blair with a "push" that swung the British to "finally agree" that a UN Security Council resolution was "not legally required". Robin Cook later stated in Parliament and that the war was legal. Interestingly, Blair did not. This article does not look at whether or not such an exchange took place; rather look at the ethical issues that such a situation would generate. The article suggests what the ethical obligations of the key legal players in such institutional dramas should be—including governments seeking advice, the lawyers giving it, the ministers reporting it and the opposition in Parliament. The article sets out the particular responsibilities of the lawyers and officials of a Westminster system. It also sets out some of the institutional mechanisms for making it more likely that those obligations are fulfilled—as always through the interaction of obligations by different players that make it more risky for any player to breach his or her ethical obligations. Analogous duties would be faced by the relevant actors in other systems.

More and more lawyers but still no judges

This paper discusses some parallels and contrasts between the legal roads to war and suggest that the case is stronger than ever for adjudication of the matter before an independent tribunal where the competing views can be tested.

Shareholder values, not shareholder value : the role of 'ethical funds' and 'ethical entrepreneurs' in connecting shareholders' values with their investments

This article rebuts the still-common assumption that managers of capitalist entities have a duty, principally or even exclusively, to maximise the monetary return to investors on their investments. It argues that this view is based on a misleadingly simplistic conception of human values and motivation. Not only is acting solely to maximise long-term shareholder value difficult, it displays, at best, banal single-mindedness and, at worst, sociopathy. In fact, real investors and managers have rich constellations of values that should be taken account of in all their decisions, including their business decisions. Awareness of our values, and public expression of our commitment to exemplify them, make for healthier investment and, in the long term, a healthier corporate world. Individuals and funds investing on the basis of such values, in companies that express their own, display humanity rather than pathology. Preamble I always enjoyed the discussions that Michael Whincop and I had about the interaction of ethics and economics. Each of us could see an important role for these disciplines, as well as our common discipline of law. We also shared an appreciation of the institutional context within which much of the drama of life is played out. In understanding the behaviour of individuals and the choices they make, it seemed axiomatic to each of us that ethics and economics have a lot to say. This was also true of the institutions in which they operate. Michael ·had a strong interest in 'the new institutional economics' I and I had a strong interest in 'institutionalising ethics' right through the 1990s.' This formed the basis of some fascinating and fruitful discussions. Professor Charles Sampford is Director, Key Centre for Ethics, Law, Justice and Governance, Foundation Professor of Law at Griffith University and President, International Institute for Public Ethics.DrVirginia Berry is a Research Fellow at theKey Centre for Ethics, Law,Justice andGovernance, Griffith University. Oliver Williamson, one of the leading proponents of the 'new institutional economics', published a number of influential works - see Williamson (1975, 1995,1996). Sampford (1991),' pp 185-222. The primary focus of discussions on institutionalising ethics has been in public sectorethics: see, for example, Preston and Sampford (2002); Sampford (1994), pp 114-38. Some discussion has, however, moved beyond the public sector to include business - see Sampford 200408299

World Ethic Forum Conference Proceedings

World Ethics Forum conference proceedings : the joint conference of The International Institute for Public Ethics (IIPE) and The World Bank : leadership, ethics and integrity in public life : 9-11 April 2006, Keble College, University of Oxford UK /

Towards a global carbon integrity system : learning from the GFC and avoiding a GCC

This paper examines some of the central global ethical and governance challenges of climate change and carbon emis-sions reduction in relation to globalization, the “global financial crisis” (GFC), and unsustainable conceptions of the “good life”, and argues in favour of the development of a global carbon “integrity system”. It is argued that a funda-mental driver of our climate problems is the incipient spread of an unsustainable Western version of the “good life”, where resource-intensive, high-carbon western lifestyles, although frequently criticized as unsustainable and deeply unsatisfying, appear to have established an unearned ethical legitimacy. While the ultimate solution to climate change is the development of low carbon lifestyles, the paper argues that it is also important that economic incentives support and stimulate that search: the sustainable versions of the good life provide an ethical pull, whilst the incentives provide an economic push. Yet, if we are going to secure sustainable low carbon lifestyles, it is argued, we need more than the ethical pull and the economic push. Each needs to be institutionalized—built into the governance of global, regional, national, sub-regional, corporate and professional institutions. Where currently weakness in each exacerbates the weaknesses in others, it is argued that governance reform is required in all areas supporting sustainable, low carbon versions of the good life.

Encouraging ethics and challenging corruption : reforming governance in public institutions

Encouraging Ethics and Preventing Corruption brings theory and practice together in addressing the question: How are we to be ethical in public life and through public institutions? It is a major contribution to public sector ethics within Australia and internationally because it provides an exhaustive analysis of reform across a decade in one jurisdiction, Queensland, and then proceeds to itemise a best practice integrity system or ethics regime. Drawing on the extensive research of two of Australia's leading practical ethicists, this text is essential reading for all students and practitioners of applied and professional ethics in the public sphere. Part A of the text provides a preferred theoretical and conceptual framework which both justifies and guides the development of a public sector ethics regime. Part B examines the place of the individual within a world of institutional ethics. Part C outlines the Queensland governance reforms introduced since 1989 following the Fitzgerald Inquiry which exposed corruption in the police and ministry. The final chapter, the 'Epilogue', gathers the insights of earlier chapters and suggests a more explicitly ethics-centred approach to governance reform that may take us 'beyond best practice'. Clearly, while it is the Australian context we have in mind, we are confident that this is a text which addresses the quest for integrity and ethics in government wherever society is committed to social and liberal democratic ideals.

Management, organisation, and ethics in the public sector

Since the 1980s, in Australia and other developed nations, public sector management philosophies and how the public sector is organized have changed dramatically. At the same time, there have been many demands, and several attempts, to preserve and promote ethical behaviour within the public sector - though few go much beyond the publication of a code. Both developments require an understanding of how public organizations operate in this new environment. Organizational and management theory are seen as providing important potential insights into the opportunities and pitfalls for building ethics into the practices, culture and norms of public organizations. This book brings together the experience and research of a range of "reflective practitioners" and "engaged academics" in public sector management, organizational theory, management theory, public sector ethics and law. It addresses what management and organization theory might suggest about the nature of public organizations and the institutionalization of ethics.

Ethics and public health

Note: see later edition of this work at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/47632/ This chapter introduces you to the basic ethical principles that underpin public health practice. The themes to be considered in this chapter include: the characteristics of ‘ethics’, the justification for reflecting on ethics and values, the foundations of public health ethics, whether and how we can incorporate ethics and values into our practice and the nature of some of the potential ethical complications of public health practice.

Ethics and public health

• recognise that “ethics” is often defined and approached in different ways • describe the foundations and development of public health ethics • summarise some key ethical systems and their relevance to public health practice • outline and critique some codes of ethics, and discuss their application to public health practice • recognise, evaluate and communicate ethical concerns regarding public health, and apply ethical principles in your practice.

Communication ethics in public health

As new diseases and medical conditions emerge, new community groups appear in the public health arena as consumer advocates or lobby groups seeking to affect policy or to represent ‘communities’ formed around these new diseases and conditions. The role of these groups in public health, their political status, and the extent to which they are actually representative are highly problematic for public health. These new constellations of social groups and activities challenge traditional ideas about public health decision-making and demand a rethinking of the constituency and limits of public health. Using discourse theory, symbolic interactionism, and ethological theory, the authors examine one case, exploring the perspectives of various communities on hepatitis C, and explore some issues that this raises for public health.