Apparently when you become an advocate for justice, you sign a life time commitment to fight for human freedoms, economic emancipation and their rights in life. I independently chose this path a few years ago, and the challenges that lie ahead are beyond my wildest imagination. In 1980, I never imagined in future I would ever be on the opposite side of any of our leaders, especially those I recognised as our liberator’s, but I guess with responsibility comes free will. Free will enables individuals to make choices between good or bad decisions, however once they have used their free will and made a decision, if in any way the result of that choice causes harm or injury to another human, they are morally responsible to accept the punishment for their free will actions. When we see someone in a life threatening situation, it is our moral responsibility to help them to survive, but we independently have the free will to choose that moral decision or act unethically in an immoral way.
Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.
Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law. ‘International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.’
The principle of universality of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law. This principle, as first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948, has been reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions, declarations, and resolutions. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, for example, noted that it is the duty of States to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems.
Nowadays organizations and society are concerned about unethical behaviour. One type of unethical behaviour common in African governance and management is crimes of obedience, where followers are influenced by a leader to engage in behaviour they would otherwise consider unethical. People who see themselves as leadership material and hold leaders in high esteem are more likely to view leaders as having more responsibility for ethical decisions and behaviours than followers. Consequently, such persons when placed in a follower position may be more susceptible to commit crimes of obedience through the process of moral disengagement by displacing responsibility for their behaviour onto the leader.
Research findings indicate correlations between moral disengagement levels and individual differences such as locus of control, sympathy, social dominance orientation, and cynicism (Baker, Detert, & Trevino, 2006); academic efficacy and self-regulatory efficacy (Bandura, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, & Regalia, 2001); and demographic characteristics such as gender and age (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996). The moral disengagement mechanism that is particularly applicable to crimes of obedience is the displacement or diffusion of responsibility (Bandura, 1999a; Wood & Bandura, 1989). Followers who obey unethical orders from a leader may do so because moral disengagement through the displacement or diffusion of responsibility is facilitated by their belief that followers are less responsible than leaders for the consequences of their actions.
I have chosen to include this academic research finding into my blog article today as I have found it effective in translating the Zimbabwean leadership - follower scenario. Our society has gradually accepted and in some cases adopted a corrupt system of governance supported by a morally unjust culture full of greed and deceit. Perhaps my statement may be a bit harsh to those amongst us who still struggle to build a morally cohesive society that believes in the values of ‘ubuntu’’chivanhu’. So perhaps the justice we seek now is actually beyond just leadership, we should re-examine ourselves as citizens of one nation, our relationship and understanding of our shared values and beliefs.
Do we actually have a cohesive society that understands the basics of family and neighbour relations? Are we actually respecting each other as citizens of one nation and the world? I fear our society has been polluted and infested with negativity associated with class divisions, race, and tribe, political affiliation, rich and poor. I do not believe we are doing enough to rectify these destructive classifications in our society. This is not the sole duty of community leaders, our reliance on leadership for direction has made us dependant and less innovative and productive.
Those progressing are either capitalising on these destructive elements or have simple chosen to manipulate the situation in their favour. Economic empowerment will not be handed to anyone on a silver plate; we have to demand a fair and just system that can provide fair opportunities for growth and development of all members of our society, we don’t need selective justice based on classification or affiliation.
“Ultimately economic freedom and justice will be brought about by a united people acting together for a common good, not individual leaders as has been the traditional approach. Only when people can fully utilise their combined power to demand justice will we have the socio-economic environment we want to see. There’s too much power in the hands of a few men.”
No comments:
Post a Comment