(UPSC Ethics Simplified is a special series under UPSC Essentials by The Indian Express. It examines news and syllabus themes from an ethical perspective, integrates real-life or hypothetical case studies, and revisits core concepts of ethics. The series aligns current affairs with fundamental ethical principles to promote an ethical understanding of life, helping aspirants develop clarity, application skills, and value-based understanding for GS-IV. In this article, ethicist Nanditesh Nilay discusses pressure of the ‘system’, and the question of ethics in a life of a civil servant.)
Whenever an honest civil servant resigns, the common complaint is that the system does not support an upright officer. As a result, one begins to see oneself as the “square peg,” with all the “round holes” surrounding them, or simply a “misfit” in the system. That sedulous work ethic gradually becomes illusory for such an officer, and sometimes there is a realisation that living within a compromised system is like existing in an era of eramnesia (the realisation of being born in the wrong period and wishing to live in another one).
What exactly is ‘system’?
The ‘system’ here is the entire framework, including the bureaucracy, legal regulations, financial incentives, and decision-making mechanisms, that is intended to deliver services or maintain order.
Boardman and Sauser, in their paper “System of Systems: The Meaning of”, assert that “a system is a collection of entities and their interrelationships gathered together to form a whole greater than the sum of the parts.” Our attention, therefore, is directed to the parts (entities), the relationships between them, and the whole itself, something extra better than a mere collection of components. This “something extra” emerges not by chance but through purposeful integration, an idea that has gained clarity only recently through concepts such as system architecture.
Thinking ethically
We are often asked whom the system fails to support. Does the system merely encourage unethical practices, or does it actively promote them? And do those who refuse to participate in such practices ultimately have to resign? Perhaps yes, perhaps no.
Yes, because an officer may feel there is no secondary system to support ethical choices; and no, because the primary system always claims to have a code of conduct manual or compliance mechanisms.
However, over time, a person of probity often finds oneself a lone walker, as others within the system fall on the wrong side of conduct, misusing power unethically and treating greed as a necessary choice to remain “practical” in a so-called utopian world.
Story continues below this ad
In governance, despite persistent criticism of the system, there exists a robust architecture and sufficient space for those who strive to balance honesty with deliverables. In this regard, it is important to see that the system is not a single villain but a complex web of structures, rules, incentives, and relationships that can both constrain and enable ethical action. Over time, upright officers may feel isolated as unethical behaviour becomes normalised and practicality is confused with compromise. Yet, governance still offers space for ethical conduct, and institutions endure largely due to officers of probity who act as moral anchors. Even initiatives like The Indian Express in Governance Awards testify to this idea. This Award attempts to identify and recognize the excellence in innovations at the district level by rewarding the spirit of the work against all odds including system failures.
The broader discourse, therefore, places greater emphasis on an individual’s ethical choices rather than on the compelling temptations of life or surrendering to the flaws of the system.
How do individuals make ethical decisions within the system, and why are some people better at ethical decision-making than others?
Drawing on ethical decision-making theories, let us understand how ethical choices depend not only on personal values or organisational culture but also on how morally intense an issue appears and the moral maturity of the decision-maker.
Thomas Jones, in his seminal article “Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model” (1991), published in the Academy of Management Review, argued that ethical decision-making (EDM) should not focus solely on individual characteristics, organisational environment, or situational factors. Instead, it must also account for the ethical issue itself, which plays a central role at every stage of the EDM process, awareness, judgment, intention, and behaviour. Jones proposed that moral intensity consists of six components: magnitude of consequences, social consensus, probability of effect, temporal immediacy, proximity, and concentration of effect. Moral intensity increases when consequences are large, immediate, and affect people close to the decision-maker.
Story continues below this ad
Similarly, John Tsalikis, Bruce Seaton, and Philip Shepherd (2007) concluded that the most influential components shaping ethical perceptions are probability of effect, magnitude of consequences, and temporal immediacy. Earlier, Rest simplified ethical decision-making into four stages: recognising the moral issue, making a moral judgment, establishing moral intent (prioritising moral judgment over other considerations), and engaging in moral behaviour. Accurate recognition of ethical dilemmas, Rest argued, is more likely when the moral agent is at a higher stage of moral development, as proposed by Kohlberg.
Kohlberg’s six stages of moral development, grouped into three levels, pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional, suggest that moral reasoning evolves progressively, with later stages better equipped to handle complex moral dilemmas. Individuals at these stages base decisions on universal moral principles and demonstrate greater consistency in ethical decision-making.
Following ethical choices, therefore, requires the value of probity, derived from the Latin probus, meaning “honest”, and a proven commitment to integrity. The system needs such officers of proven honesty, even though they frequently find themselves in ethical dilemmas. No one can deny that institutions survive largely because of these individuals, those who never hesitate to restate the obvious, uphold the moral compass, and reaffirm the centrality of ethics. Hence, while the “system” is often blamed for pushing honest civil servants out, ethical governance ultimately survives because of individuals who choose integrity despite systemic pressures.
“I am a judge, not a butcher.” From history chapters
Justice Syed Agha Haider Judge who refused to pass death sentence to Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhde (Image credit: X account of Mohd Yusuf Haider)
Syed Agha Haider, a judge of the Lahore High Court during the final years of British rule, is remembered for embodying the tension between institutional pressure and personal conscience. During the Bhagat Singh trial in the Lahore Conspiracy Case, when the colonial system sought swift punishment, he is said to have resisted being part of a process that violated his moral judgment, captured in the line attributed to him, “I am a judge, not a butcher.” His decision to step aside illustrates how ethical decision-making within rigid systems ultimately rests on individual probity. The episode endures as a reminder that institutions survive not merely through rules, but through officers who place conscience above compliance.
Story continues below this ad
Post Read Question:
While the “system” is often blamed for pushing honest civil servants out, ethical governance ultimately survives because of individuals who choose integrity despite systemic pressures. Discuss.
(The writer is the author of ‘Being Good’, ‘Aaiye, Insaan Banaen’, ‘Kyon’ and ‘Ethikos: Stories Searching Happiness’. 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.)
Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.
Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on UPSC section of The Indian Express on Instagram and X.
Story continues below this ad
For your queries and suggestions write at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com
PREVIOUS ARTICLES ON UPSC ETHICS SIMPLIFIED:
This Republic Day, understanding idea of ‘Self-Sovereignty’ and why ethics matter
How does Vivekananda’s philosophy take us from ‘I’ to humanity?
Beyond the ‘Word of the Year’: Why 2026 needs a ‘Value of the Year’ and what should it be?
Story continues below this ad
How IndiGo Crisis is a case study on ‘Safety, Trust, and Service’
Gen Z in UPSC : What happens to civil services values?
Can compassion bridge the gap between humans and animals?
How and why Civil Servants should be ‘enablers’ of growth, not mere ‘regulators’
Politicians, Athletes, UPSC Aspirants: Do Results Matter? Aristotle has an answer
Story continues below this ad
How must a police officer choose between a VVIP and a common man at ‘Ram Lalla’ Darshan?
