Project Report on Draw and Design Code of Conduct of the Politicians - Assignment Point
Project Report on Draw and Design Code of Conduct of the Politicians
Subject: Arts, Political Science | Topics:


The project paper on program exercise a significant importance as it is undertaken after completion of a course. It is an integral part of the MBA program, because it is compulsory for the students. The students are sent to the various institutions where they are assigned to accomplish the project paper. The students work closely with the institutions. At the end of the course, the students are required to place the accomplishment and findings of the work through the writing of report covering the topic assigned to them. During the course each student is supervised and guided by a course teacher. It enables the students to develop their analytical skills and scholastic aptitudes.

A politician is one of these professions which are associated by the society with particularly strict ethical requirements. They concern, however, mainly the professional sphere. Most respondents believe that private life of politicians should not be the subject of media interest; hence the society should not be interested in it, as far as it does not affect professional conduct of a politician.

Nearly one in three of respondents agree mat journalists should not be interested in private life of politicians, who, like other people, have the right to privacy. One quarter of respondents believe that because of their public rote private life of politicians should be known to the society. Because the private sphere is excluded from the interest of the public opinion, i.e. it is separated from the public; are generally evaluated and verified with regard to their competence and not to their personal and family situation. The considerable majority of respondents declare that they would vote for a divorced politician or one who has an informal relationship. In the opinion of over half of respondents, even marital infidelity does not disqualify a politician as far as he/she is competent and has necessary skills.

However, a situation changes if a politician represents a different sexual orientation. Two thirds of respondents decide not to vote for such a politician despite his/her competence. On the other hand, more man one in four of respondents would not mind homosexuality of a politician.

In this study an attempt has been made to examine to what close code of conduct of the politicians could attain success in its operation.

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the code of conduct of the politicians. The specific objective of the study includes the following:
To identify indicators reflecting performance of politicians.
To assess performance measures of politicians.
To estimate relative position of the code of conduct of the politicians.
To examine strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
To suggest possible measures to less in politicians.


In this project paper we have to include the code of conduct of the politicians. This gives some idea about the methods to be followed.

For this paper we have collect data from the secondary source from other difference news paper and collect some form like internet.

In this report we collect some data from primary source from politicians, some advisor and discussion with the executives / workers other difference people.


The study has been conducted to make a full-blown analysis of code of conduct of the politicians. On the way of our study, we faced the following problems, which may be termed as the limitations of the study:

i. At the time of preparing the report we tried to gather every details of process but the major limitation is lack of adequate information.
ii. As we are a third person of political it was more difficult for our to collect data from other sources.




Political history narrative and analysis of political events, ideas, movements, and leaders. It is usually structured around the nation state. It is distinct from, but related to, other fields of history such as social history, economic history, and military history.

Generally, political history focuses on events relating to nation-states and the formal political process. According to Hegel, Political History “is an idea of the state with a moral and spiritual force beyond the material interests of its subjects: it followed that the state was the main agent of historical change”. This contrasts with one, for instance, social history, which focuses predominantly on the actions and lifestyles of ordinary people, or people’s history, which is historical work from the perspective of common people.

Diplomatic history, sometimes referred to as “Rankian History” in honor of Leopold von Ranke, focuses on politics, politicians and other high rulers and views them as being the driving force of continuity and change in history. This type of political history is the study of the conduct of international relations between states or across state boundaries over time. This is the most common form of history and is often the classical and popular belief of what history should be.

Diplomatic history is the past aggregate of the art and practice of conducting negotiations between accredited persons representing groups or nations. occurring in succession leading from the past to the present and even into the future regarding diplomacy, the conduct of state relations through the intercession of individuals with regard to issues of peace-making, culture, economics, trade and war. Diplomatic history records or narrates events relating to or characteristic of diplomacy.


The first “scientific” political history was written by Leopold von Ranke in Germany in the 19th century. His methodologies profoundly affected the way historians critically examine sources; see historiography for a more complete analysis of the methodology of various approaches to history. An important aspect of political history is the study of ideology as a force for historical change. One author asserts that “political history as a whole cannot exist without the study of ideological differences and their implications.”[5] Studies of political history typically centre around a single nation and its political change and development. Some historians identify the growing trend towards narrow specialization in political history during recent decades: “while a college professor in the 1940s sought to identify himself as a “historian”, by the 1950s “American historian” was the designation.

From the 1970s onwards, new movements sought to challenge traditional approaches to political history. The development of social history and women’s history shifted the emphasis away from the study of leaders and national decisions, and towards the role of ordinary citizens; “…by the 1970s “the new social history” began replacing the older style. Emphasis shifted to a broader spectrum of American life, including such topics as the history of urban life, public health, ethnicity, the media, and poverty.” As such, political history is sometimes seen as the more ‘traditional’ kind of history, in contrast with the more ‘modern’ approaches of other fields of history.


Although much of existing written history might be classified as diplomatic history – Thucydides, certainly, is among other things, highly concerned with the relations among states – the modern form of diplomatic history was codified in the 19th century by Leopold von Ranke, a German historian. Ranke wrote largely on the history of Early Modern Europe, using the diplomatic archives of the European powers (particularly the Venetians) to construct a detailed understanding of the history of Europe wie es eigentlich gewesen (“as it actually happened.”) Ranke saw diplomatic history as the most important kind of history to write because of his idea of the “Primacy of Foreign Affairs” (Primat der Aussenpolitik), arguing that the concerns of international relations drive the internal development of the state. Ranke’s understanding of diplomatic history relied on the large number of official documents produced by modern western governments as sources.

Ranke’s understanding of the dominance of foreign policy, and hence an emphasis on diplomatic history, remained the dominant paradigm in historical writing through the first half of the twentieth century. This emphasis, combined with the effects of the War Guilt Clause in the Treaty of Versailles (1919) which ended the First World War, led to a huge amount of historical writing on the subject of the origins of the war in 1914, with the involved governments printing huge, carefully edited, collections of documents and numerous historians writing multi-volume histories of the origins of the war. In general, the early works in this vein, including Fritz Fischer’s controversial (at the time) 1961 thesis that German goals of “world power” were the principal cause of the war, fit fairly comfortably into Ranke’s emphasis on Aussenpolitik


In the course of the 1960s, however, some German historians (notably Hans-Ulrich Wehler and his cohort) began to rebel against this idea, instead suggesting a “Primacy of Domestic Politics” (Primat der Innenpolitik), in which the insecurities of (in this case German) domestic policy drove the creation of foreign policy. This led to a considerable body of work interpreting the domestic policies of various states and the ways this influenced their conduct of foreign policy.

At the same time, the middle of the twentieth century began to see a general de-emphasis on diplomatic history. The French Annales school had already put an emphasis on the role of geography and economics on history, and of the importance of broad, slow cycles rather than the constant apparent movement of the “history of events” of high politics. The most important work of the Annales school, Fernand Braudel’s The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II, contains a traditional Rankean diplomatic history of Philip II’s Mediterranean policy, but only as the third and shortest section of a work largely focusing on the broad cycles of history in the longue durée (“long term”). The Annales were broadly influential, leading to a turning away from diplomatic and other forms of political history towards an emphasis on broader trends of economic and environmental change. In the 1960s and 1970s, an increasing emphasis on giving a voice to the voiceless and writing the history of the underclasses, whether by using the quantitative statistical methods of social history or the more qualitative assessments of cultural history, also undermined the centrality of diplomatic history to the historical discipline.

Nevertheless, diplomatic history has always remained a historical field with a great interest to the general public, and considerable amounts of work are still done in the field, often in much the same way that Ranke pioneered in the middle years of the 19th century.




A politician (from Greek “polis”) is an individual who is involved in influencing public decision making through the influence of politics or a person who influences the way a society is governed. This includes people who hold decision-making positions in government, and people who seek those positions, whether by means of election, coup d’état, appointment, electoral fraud, conquest, right of inheritance (see also: divine right) or other means. Politics are not limited to governance through public office. Political offices may also be held in corporations, and other entities that are governed by self-defined political processes.


• A person who is active in party politics.

• In a state, a member of the executive branch of government, or the office of Head of State, as well as the legislative branch, and regional and local levels of government.

• Any person influencing group opinions in his or her favor can be termed a politician. For example, a worker participating in office politics is a politician, but only so far as the operations of his or her workplace are concerned.

• Political activity: Some law enforcement officers, such as sheriffs, and many judges who are elected or appointed because of their political views or popularity.


• Members of government who serve purely functional roles, such as bureaucrats.

• Members of the judicial branch, law enforcement, and the military are not usually regarded as being politicians since they are generally executing or adjudicating established law and custom.

• Ordinary citizens with the power to vote cannot properly be called politicians even though they can participate in group decision-making. A politician participates in public debate that leads to a group decision being reached, while a voter is simply responding to that debate.


Public Choice Theory involves the use of modern economic tools to study problems that are traditionally in the province of political science. (A more general term is ‘political economy’, an earlier name for ‘economics’ that evokes its practical and theoretical origins but should not be mistaken for the Marxian use of the same term.)

In particular, it studies the behavior of voters, politicians, and government officials as (mostly) self-interested agents and their interactions in the social system either as such or under alternative constitutional rules. These can be represented a number of ways, including standard constrained utility maximization, game theory, or decision theory. Public choice analysis has roots in positive analysis (“what is”) but is often used for normative purposes (“what ought to be”), to identify a problem or suggest how a system could be improved by changes in constitutional rules. A key formulation of public choice theory is in terms of rational choice, the agent-based proportioning of scarce means to given ends. An overlapping formulation with a different focus is positive political theory. Another related field is social choice theory.

There are also Austrian variants of public choice theory (suggested by Mises, Hayek, Kirzner, Lopez, and Boettke) in which it is assumed that bureaucrats and politicians are benevolent but have access to limited information.


Although members of governing bodies are often honored, many people today have a poor opinion of politicians as a class.

Politicians can also be criticized for becoming “career politicians.” A politician who makes politics the source of their income, yet has to face re-election every few years can be less likely to make bold decisions or side with an unpopular bill. Some feel that fear of “rocking the boat” leads to a stagnant political climate, in which it becomes hard to address injustices and create change. Various measures have been taken in attempt to mitigate this effect, such as the implementation of term limits and paying them less.
Professor Paul Finn has argued that “the most fundamental fiduciary relationship in our society is manifestly that which exists between the community (the people) and the state, its agencies and officials.”

Many suggest the basic problem of stopping Human Rights violations and political negligence stems from the lack of understanding by media and politicians on the laws of fiduciary control. In equity fiduciary control suggests obligations that not only include duties of good faith and loyalty, but also include duties of skill and competence in managing the people’s interests. After all, Government is a trust structure created by people to manage certain services within society with the politicians depended on by the people to do that task. Therefore the relationship between government and it’s politicians and the governed is clearly a fiduciary one.

Rules such as Sovereign Immunity and Crown and Judicial Immunity are now being targeted as the very tools of oppression that are preventing victims from taking action against the people controlling the country who are causing the failure of care. Originating from within the Courts of Equity, the fiduciary concept was partly designed to prevent those holding positions of power from abusing their authority.

This way of thinking suggests anyone accepting any political or government control over the interests of people should be judged by the most exacting fiduciary standards given politicians are the most important fiduciaries in any society given they hold coercive power over the people. The fiduciary relationship arises from the government and its politicians ability to control people with the exercise of that power. In effect the argument is, if politicians have the power to abolish or ignore any rights they should be burdened with the fiduciary duty to protect people’s rights because the government (or others engaging politicians on their behalf) would benefit from the exercise of discretion to extinguish rights which it alone had the power to dispose of.

Chapter 4

Politician Code of Conduct


Code of conduct is a set of rules outlining the responsibilities of or proper practices for an individual or organization. Related concepts include ethical codes and honor codes.
In its 2007 International Good Practice Guidance, Defining and Developing an Effective Code of Conduct for Organizations, the International Federation of Accountants, provided the following working definition:

“Principals, values, standards, or rules of behavior that guide the decisions, procedures and systems of an organization in a way that (a) contributes to the welfare of its key stakeholders, and (b) respects the rights of all constituents affected by its operations.”

Code of Ethics, which sets voluntary standards for exchange in credit information between banks. The code also includes prohibitions on lender take-backs, and so on. A statement of principles concerning the behavior of those who subscribe to the code.
Example: All Realtors are required to subscribe to a code of ethics that defines proper professional behavior and practices that are considered unbecoming a professional real estate

Rules of conduct or ethical codes are often considered to be characteristic of professions, as opposed to craft and trade associations. They are particularly common within health care professions, where they set guidelines for how professionals should act in dealings with their patients and with each other in clinical care, in public health or epidemiological studies, and in experimental studies involving animals, humans, and social or population groups.


Rules of conduct are enforced through ethics or professional conduct committees, which can impose sanctions such as withdrawal or suspension of professional group membership or of licenses to practice. They can also require practitioners to make reparations to those they have treated in breach of a code or to undertake instruction in professional ethics. Codes of conduct or ethics are becoming more widely adopted as various organizations seek to assure the public that their members are required to adhere to ethical practices. Health care professions, however, can also invoke the legacy of the physicians’ historic Hippocratic Oath to show that ethical conduct is the very foundation of their practice. Professionals and their interest groups have an incentive to develop ethical codes or guidelines to dissuade legislators from enacting more rigid, legally enforceable, and punitive laws.

The ethical principles that underlie codes of conduct and ethics guidelines are beneficence, or the duty to do good; non malfeasance, or the duty to do no harm; and the principle of justice. The principle of justice is popularly seen to be based on punitive or corrective justice, demonstrated in the liability of offenders against an institution’s code to forfeit their membership or professional status and to make good the wrongs they have done. Another aspect of justice requires that like cases be treated alike, demonstrated in the expectation that those bound by the same code will observe the same standards of conduct and integrity.

Codes may also be prepared in order to require and facilitate adherence to a religious, spiritual, or philosophical tradition. For instance, membership in the Catholic Hospital Association, which is affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, requires hospital administrations to adhere to Church teaching on such matters as nonperformance of abortions and sterilization procedures. The association may also limit the recruitment or promotion of divorced applicants to certain offices, based on the Church’s views on divorce and local laws on hospital discrimination on the basis of marital status.


Codes of conduct and ethics guidelines that are prepared in order to standardize behavior within a profession or among practitioners of an occupation may relate to preexisting practice in various ways. Some guidelines may codify longstanding and approved practices, which are formally established to guard against dangers of laxity and changes in practice. For instance, it is a common rule that professionals not practice in collaboration with related commercial product manufacturers or service suppliers. Thus, physicians cannot participate in the profits of pharmacists who fill the prescriptions they write for their patients. This prevents vertical integration of business interests that might otherwise occur, and also protects patients against physicians having a conflict of interest that may lead them to over prescribe medications or prescribe unnecessary or unduly costly medications.

The celebrated Nuremberg Code, which addresses medical experimentation with human subjects, was adopted by the International War Crimes Tribunal in 1947, after the Second World War. Its function was to restore the standards of research integrity in studies of human subjects, which had been grossly violated by physicians tried and condemned by the tribunal, and to protect vulnerable persons in such studies. The code incorporates the most basic ethical standards of conduct, which were drawn from the research guidelines of many countries, including prewar Germany.

Sometimes codes and guidelines are established to change preexisting practices, either to remedy faults or to keep practices or earlier codes up-to-date. For instance, in 1964 the World Medical Association adopted its Declaration of Helsinki, which deals with biomedical research involving human subjects. The purpose was to update and expand the Nuremberg Code, which addressed only the medical research outrages and inhumanities committed against powerless detainees of concentration camps under the Nazi administration. As such, the Nuremberg Code was so narrowly directed that it would have made much necessary, humanely conducted, and ethically conducted research impossible. For instance, the 1947 code provides only that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” and that “the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent.” These provisions omit and might seem to preclude research to advance health care for children, mentally impaired persons or unconscious head-injury patients. Research of this nature satisfies scientific standards only when such persons themselves are studied. The Helsinki Declaration proposed ethical guidelines under which such studies could be scientifically conducted. Further, the 1964 Declaration was amended in 1975, 1983, 1989 and 1996, and remains under continuing review.

Some codes and guidelines aim not to change preexisting practices, but to codify them in accessible, comprehensible language, or to reform those that have become antiquated in light of conceptual or technological developments. A conceptual reform has occurred, for instance, because research guidelines used to exclude women of reproductive age from pharmaceutical and other studies of unproven products, on the ground that these studies might cause harm to embryos or fetuses such women had conceived. This exclusion has resulted in many women of reproductive age, including some who are pregnant, taking products that have never been tested for safety and efficacy on women who might be pregnant. In order to test products for safety and effectiveness in pregnancy, research guidelines now often require that women of reproductive age be included in studies, unless human experience or animal studies have shown that a product is likely to be harmful to pregnant women or their unborn children.

An earlier recon capitalization occurred in 1973 when the International Council of Nurses amended its Code for Nurses, originally adopted in 1953. The original code required a nurse’s loyalty and obedience to the physician the nurse served, reflecting a culture of nursing dating to the time of Florence Nightingale, the founder of modern nursing. The code was amended in 1973, however, deleting this requirement and replacing it with a requirement of loyalty to the patient. Physicians, however, did not necessarily note any change in nurses’ ethical priorities, including when physicians were members of nursing councils considering cases of nursing misconduct. This raised the unresolved issue of divided loyalties between physicians and patients, and whether the new concept should displace the earlier concept or coexist with it.

Codes that reflect a newer concept may also retain provisions that were part of earlier codes, and may not distinguish items that change earlier practice from items designed to maintain former practice. In this case a code may be understood only by exploring records of committee meetings or other discussions conducted while the code was being prepared, or by considering subsequent requests for clarification before tribunals such as institutional ethics review boards.


Documents designed to affect conduct have various names, which may indicate different purposes. A code may consolidate and systematize preexisting practices without changing them, or may prescribe new practices that differ from or supplement those in earlier codes. International documents tend not to be described as codes because in the legal tradition of continental Europe, which now extends into Central and South America and Africa, a code, such as the Code Napoléon, is a legally binding document. Similarly, in the United States, the code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46 of which governs protection of human subjects of research, is legally enacted under authority of the Public Health Service Act. Documents called “guidelines” are usually understood to guide rather than to strictly govern practice. It is expected, however, that a deliberate departure from a guideline will have to be explained, and ethics review committees may say within what limits a departure is justifiable. For instance, many guidelines on ethical professional practice require that practitioners have no conflict of interests and serve patients with uncompromised loyalty. A conflict may arise, for instance, when a physician has a financial interest in a clinical laboratory to which a patient may be referred for testing. An alternative response to the prohibition of any conflict of interests, however, is that it be disclosed in advance to those seeking services. They may then decide for themselves whether or not to receive services. A client’s knowing consent thus neutralizes an appearance of conflict.

Like a code, a “declaration” may articulate existing expectations, as was the case with the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). The Declaration of Helsinki, on the other hand, outlined principles intended for future application. It is, in fact, subtitled “Recommendations Guiding Physicians in Biomedical Research.” It is, however, often applied quite strictly, and in some countries committees created according to its provisions are called “Helsinki committees.” Inadequacies in the declaration are remedied by formal amendments, which may be the subject of intense reflection and debate.

Intergovernmental organizations whose agreements have no legally binding force in member countries may acknowledge this by naming their agreements “recommendations.” The Council of Europe followed this practice, for instance, in its Recommendation Concerning Medical Research on Human Beings (1990), and in its Recommendation on Xenon transplantation (1997). The World Health Organization (WHO), however, whose conclusions on ethical practice are similarly unenforceable in member countries, usually describes its documents as guidelines, as in its Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice for Trials on Pharmaceutical Products (1999) and the Guidelines for the Promotion of Human Rights of Persons with Mental Disorders (1996). Similarly described are conclusions of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, jointly constituted by WHO and UNESCO, including its International Guidelines for Ethical Review of Epidemiological Studies (1991).

Documents intended to influence conduct are also classified as “principles,” an example being the Council of Europe’s Ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Bioethics’ Principles in the Field of Human Artificial Procreation (1989); and “resolutions,” which include the United Nations Commission on Human Rights’ Resolution on Human Rights and Bioethics (1993 and 1997). These and other documents provide texts and concepts that are used in many ways: legislatures may embody them in law; funding agencies, universities, and hospitals may incorporate them into contracts for the funding of recipients, faculty members, and investigators; and ethics and discipline committees of professional and licensing authorities may refer to them in determining professional misconduct.


Codes and guidelines are used to establish common minimal standards of conduct that those bound by them must invariably observe. They also serve to improve standards to the highest attainable level and to demonstrate a profession’s most worthy aspirations. A code used to determine professional misconduct will set a minimum acceptable standard, or a floor, and condemn any practice that falls short. In contrast, a code that sets an aspiration target, or ceiling, is meant to inspire people to aim high, while recognizing that achievements will usually be at a lower level.

Some associations that perceive the dual roles of codes and guidelines may clearly separate standards that serve different functions. For instance, the Australian Nursing Council has both a Code of Ethics, and a Code of Professional Conduct. The Code of Ethics serves the purposes of identifying the moral commitments of the profession, providing nurses with an elevated basis for professional reflection and a guide to ethical practice, and indicating to nurses and the community the values that inspire nursing practice. In contrast, the Code of Professional Conduct informs the profession and the public of the minimum standards of acceptable conduct and provides licensing, disciplinary, and other bodies with a basis for decisions regarding nursing misconduct.



Holders of public office should take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends.


Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might influence them in the performance of their official duties.


In carrying out public business, including making public appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards and benefits, holders of public office should make choices on merit.


Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.


Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.


Holders of public office have a duty to declare any private interests relating to their public duties and to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest.


Holders of public office should promote and support these principles by leadership and example.



• Nowadays, world nations are making every effort to increase their industrial productivity with advent of the age of keen international competition. Among them, Korea has been in increasing need to enhance its competitiveness in all fields of national administration, particularly in public sectors, since the foreign exchange crisis of 1997.

• To meet that need, the Korean government has labored to remove factors of non-efficiency and low productivity in public sectors and to establish “credible government”.


• Since the foreign exchange crisis and the subsequent financial support from the IMF, the Korean government has taken reformatory measures to reduce its size, restructure and privatize public sectors, and abolish unreasonable regulations.

• In particular, to carry out regulatory reform, it enacted the “Framework Act on Administrative Regulations” in 1997, established the Regulatory Reform Committee there under and abolished 50 percent of unnecessary and unreasonable regulations by 2002.


• The realization of credible government depends on the establishment of transparent and fair government.

• Above all, the Korean government has endeavored to reform the depravity structure of public sectors and the non-transparent and undemocratic management system of enterprises, which led to the foreign exchange crisis of 1997.

First, since 1998, the Government has improved the controlling structure of enterprises into a democratic system and enhanced their accounting standards and transparency according to international standards.

The Government has adopted every possible measure to expand the disclosure scope of administrative information, enhance transparence in the process of handling various authorization and permission using internet technologies, such as “on-line system for treatment of civil petitions”, and ensure the effective operation of real name financial transaction system introduced in 1993.

The Government enacted the Act on implementation of “the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions” of the OECD in 1998, “the Anti-Money Laundering Act” in 2001, and “the Anti-Corruption Act” in 2001, which is the framework law on prevention of corruption, and established the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit and the Anti-Corruption Commission according to such Acts.

In particular, the Anti-Corruption Act has granted the Anti-Corruption Commission comprehensive powers to abolish corruption-causing systems, protect and reward whistlers of corruptive acts, conduct education and publicity for the formation of anti-corruption culture, evaluate anti-corruption policies, and perform other necessary functions for prevention of corruption.



• In spite of systematic efforts for prevention of corruption aforesaid, the problem of the establishment of ethics in public sectors remained unsettled.

• It may be said that corruption in Korea has mainly been caused by factors of system and custom. Namely, it has been generated from such systematic factors as preferential treatment system formed in the course of rapid economic development led by the Government, unreasonable regulations, and intricate administrative procedures, and from such customary factors as Korean tradition of regarding entertainments and personal connections, including birth places, blood relations, school backgrounds, etc., and of not drawing the definite line between public life and private one. To solve those problems, it is required to reform unreasonable corruption-causing customs, in addition to the improvement of systems.

• As a part of such efforts, the Korean government has endeavored to enhance public service ethics through the introduction of the property registration system for public officials based on the Public Service Ethics Act enacted in 1993 and through the enactment of “the Guidelines for Public Officials” in 1998 substituted for “the Public Service Ethics Charter” which had just functioned as ethic regulations.

• However, “the Guidelines for Politicians” had its limit in securing fair execution of duties because it lacked legal binding power and its contents were just focused on the creation of the sound climate of civil service in connection to customary practice of providing money and goods, etc. for congratulation and condolence and other gifts.

• Under backgrounds aforesaid, the Code of Conduct for Politicians was newly enacted for the purpose of establishing the standards of conduct for fair and clean execution of public service, and “the Guidelines for Public Officials “enacted in 1998 was wholly amended on May 19, 2003.



• The Code of Conduct for Politicians is based on the Anti-Corruption Act, the concrete contents of which are delegated to the Presidential Decree. Accordingly, it is a law, not a mere ethic norm, the violation of which is subject to administrative disciplinary measures.

• The Code applies to politicians of all agencies belonging to the State and local governments, and each such agency is authorized to enact a detailed code of conduct according to the character of such agency within the scope as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

• The Code sets comprehensive standards of conduct to be observed by politicians for ensuring fair execution of their duties and adopts concrete measures to settle the problems of the mixing up of public matters and private ones, the intervention in concessions using their own positions, the solicitation for favorable treatment, the demand of unjust entertainments, etc., which were chronic ills of the Korean society.

• The Code is enacted and administered by the Anti- Corruption Commission.


• Request for cancellation and alteration of unjust directions given from a senior politicians

A politician shall not be required to follow any directions, which might seriously hamper fair execution of duties, given from a senior politician to seek unjust gains for himself or any third party, subject to the explanation of the reasons therefore to the senior politician.

The politician concerned shall report to the head of an agency to which he belongs or consult with the officer in charge in the code of conduct on such unjust directions, and the head of an agency which has received such a report shall take a proper measure including, but not limited to, the cancellation or alteration of the directions.

• Request for evasion of duties involved in one’s own interest.

Where a politician judges that he might have difficulty in fairly executing his duties because they are involved in his own interest or his relative within the fourth degree falls under the duty-related person, he may make a request for evasion of such duties.

• Prohibition of intervention in concessions, preferential treatment, and solicitation for favorable treatment in personal affairs.

No politician shall, in performing his duties, accord any preferential treatment to a particular person for reasons of the involvement in his birth place, blood relation, school backgrounds, etc.

No politician shall solicit another person for his appointment, promotion, transference, etc. or unjustly intervene in other politician’s personnel affairs.

No politician shall get any unjust profit, or help another person to get any unjust profit, using his own position and allow the use of his agency’s name or his position by any other person for the purpose of seeking his own or such other person’s unjust profit.

• Handling of unjust request from a politician, etc.

Where a politician is forced or solicited by a political party to unjustly perform his duties, he shall consult with the head of the agency to which he belongs or the officer in charge of the code of conduct, who shall take measures necessary for the public official concerned against such unjust request.

• Limitation of transactions, etc. by using duty-related information

No politician shall make any property transaction or investment in securities, real estates, etc. by using information obtained in the process of the execution of his duties or helps another person make any such transaction or investment by providing such information.

The head of each central administrative agency shall set detailed standards for the scope of duty-related persons and the limitation of transactions, etc. using duty-related information, according to the area of his duties.

• Restriction on receipt of money and goods, etc.

No politician shall receive money, real estates, gifts, or other entertainments from the duty-related persons.

However, this shall not apply to food and drink, small gifts (equivalent to or less than thirty thousand won), or other facilities inevitably provided for the discharge of obligation within the scope of ordinary custom.

• Restriction on notification of matters for congratulation and condolence and on receipt of money and goods therefore

No politician shall notify his matters for congratulation or condolence to a duty-related person or a duty-related politician and give or take money and goods, etc. for congratulation and condolence in excess of the standards (fifty thousand won) as set in consideration of ordinary custom.

However, this shall not apply to money and goods, etc. provided to a public official by relatives, a graduates’ association, a religious organization, a friendly society of an agency to which he belongs, etc.

• Prohibition of borrowing of money, etc.

No politician shall borrow money or rent a real estate from a duty-related person without any compensation.


• The politician in charge of the code of conduct shall take charge of the affairs relating to the education and consultation of politician with respect to the code of conduct and the confirmation of their compliance with the code of conduct.

• Disciplinary action, etc. against violators

Any one who finds that a politician violates the code of conduct may report to the head of an agency to which the politician belongs or the officer in charge of the code of conduct of the agency, and the head of the agency who has received such a report may take necessary measures, including disciplinary action, against the politician concerned.

• Disposal of money and goods, etc. in violation

A politician who has received money and goods, etc. in excess of the prescribed standards shall immediately return them to the offered. In this case, if the offered is unknown, they shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the Lost Articles Act, etc.



• However, opinion has been divided among politician in regard to enactment of the Code of Conduct by reason that the Code is a legal order, not a mere ethic guideline, the violation of which is subject to disciplinary action, and regulates entertainments, gifts, or money and goods for congratulation and condolence, etc. given from duty-related persons, which have generally been permitted in the Korean society.

• Nevertheless, a public-opinion poll shows that 65 percent of politician and 85 percent of citizens approve of the enactment of the Code of Conduct.

• Accordingly, the Korean government is widely conducting education and publicity on the purport of enactment of the Code of Conduct, and benefits of faithful politician and citizens’ trust in public officials to be enjoyed from its enforcement.

• First, the Government has given the officers in charge of the code of conduct guidelines to be followed in conducting the education and consultation of the code, addressing the violations of the code, checking and evaluating the actual performance of the code, etc.

• Moreover, the Government is publicizing the Code of Conduct to general citizens by posting up its major contents in the civil affairs offices or through mass media


• The Anti-Corruption Commission plans to regularly check and evaluate the actual conditions of implementation of the Code of Conduct.

• First, the Anti-Corruption Commission will evaluate the detailed code of conduct enacted by each agency and recommend each such agency to make good its defects, if any. Also, the Commission plans to assess the appropriateness of the duties of the officers in charge of the code, the actual conditions of education of the code, and disciplinary action against the violators of the code, etc., and then to make public the results.


• The Government plans to enact the model code of conduct for public enterprises, government-invested research institutes, and other public service-related organizations under its guidance and supervision, the number of which amounts to about 320, during the first half of this year, and to have each of them enact and operate the code of conduct for itself based on the model code of conduct after this year.

Chapter 5

Professional Licensing for Politicians


We require licenses for realtors, doctors, lawyers, even people who cut hair or drive a car. We depend on politicians to make important decisions that affect every citizen at the city, county, state and federal levels and we don’t require them to have a license? Why not?

Maybe more important than “Why not” is “Why”.

Why do we insist on licenses for anyone?

1. To prove that they have a base level of knowledge to do the job. A lawyer or doctor needs to have a degree; a contractor or realtor must pass a test as does a driver or someone that operates a nail salon. Do we assume that every politician that runs for office has the required information?

2. A license also comes with some accepted standards of conduct. A contractor or realtor must deal fairly with their clients or face a review by the licensing authority. A lawyer is held to very high ethical standards that are subject to review by the bar association. Shouldn’t we expect our representatives to meet some level of ethical and moral behavior?

This has seemed so obvious to our long time and we was really surprised that we couldn’t find a single reference to the concept anywhere in the vast resources of the web. The closest we came (when we searched for license and politicians) was an article about the possibility of selling licenses to hunt politicians like we do for deer.


A standardized level of knowledge – don’t we want the people that are governing us to demonstrate that they have some idea what they are doing? From basic intelligence (do we really want to put up with a president and leader of the free world who, after 8 years of being corrected, still doesn’t know how to pronounce “nuclear”?), to knowledge of how the government works, and at the national level, an understanding of the world we live in, we should know that the people we elect and to whom we give our trust have been able to demonstrate that they at least know the basics.

A comprehensive code of conduct – a licensing program would give us the opportunity to define what is and isn’t acceptable behavior much like the American Bar Association and the American Medical Association do. We would recognize that being a politician is a good and honorable profession with a code of conduct that we could all be proud of.
There is a side benefit to this “Code of Conduct” idea. If there is some sort of complaint (from anyone), there is a mechanism for investigating that is much simpler than appointing a congressional prosecutor or convening a senate committee. If a realtor is dealing with the public, anyone who thinks they were treated unfairly can send in a complaint. The state licensing board reviews the complaint and, if it has merit, conducts a hearing. If found guilty, the realtor is subject to censure, fines, or loss of their license (which means that they can’t practice as a realtor). Wouldn’t this procedure help control politicians?


Implementing such a program would be similar to setting up any other licensing routine. We would suggest these steps:

Establish the scope – a city councilman does not require the same level of license that a senator should have. We would propose a local level (cities, counties, school boards), a state level (governor, state legislators, and elected state officials), and a national level (senators, congressmen, president and vice president). Each level would introduce more stringent requirements and additional information.


Decide on requirements – we would propose the following:

• Knowledge – some level of the 3 R’s and some job specific information (how does government work a the level you are seeking a license – could be state specific like realtors or contractors). As you move up the ladder, you may want to include some foreign policy and constitutional law as well as other advanced topics.

• Ethics – we could decide on a code of conduct that would make us all proud. There should be no further justification for the old phrase “all politicians are crooks”. While I would expect the code to be pretty much the same at all levels, I believe it would be set up by committees at each level.

• Background check – it seems that our press corps (or their opponent) does a pretty good job of uncovering problems in a candidate’s background but formalizing the process couldn’t hurt.

• Psychological evaluation – this one might be a little controversial but I think it is worth thinking about. It seems there are some personality traits that we really don’t want in our politicians – greed, a tendency to lie, an abnormal thirst for power. We do want someone who is honest as the day is long, dedicated to do the best for the people he or she represents, and willing and able to see all sides of a problem. Is there a test to measure the good and bad traits with some accuracy? I’m not sure but we could ask some professionals to develop something.

5.4 WHY NOT?

Well, it would certainly be a big undertaking. Happily, if we are focusing on elected officials, there are not all that many. The biggest problems would probably revolve around setting up the program. If we modeled it around the existing professional licensing programs that exist today, we will have plenty of experience to work with.

We think there will be some people that will object that we are putting requirements in the way of our pure and simple political process. To those people we would say that you should take a close look at the process as it exists – we would contend that it is neither pure nor simple.

Chapter 6



Democratically elected politicians have strayed far from their mission to protect citizens of their country. With few constraints, they have abused their positions of trust, and have chosen to use our tax revenue to undermine, overpopulate, and dissolve our social fabric. The business of running the state efficiently is apparently not as glamorous as hobnobbing with terrorists or selling citizenships to people who harm us.

The code conducts of the politicians are often controversial. If it is merely robust political combat it may raise issues of personal standards, character and judgment, but those are for voters to reflect on when re-election is desired. However where controversy arises because of misconduct, impropriety or conflicts of interest, it needs to be policed, and dealt with through penalty and enforcement mechanisms. However, seldom are politicians (of all political persuasions) held responsible for much at all. The tendency is to claim ignorance or to disclaim responsibility and point to the actions of advisors or departments who are often unaccountable to anyone except the minis. This approach has generated deep cynicism in the public.

That is why we believe we need a brake on politician’s slide into treason. We propose the following code of conduct. It no doubt needs improvement, but this may be a start.

1. Foreign aid shall not be given to nations that inarguably threaten your nation by word or deed or that discriminate against or persecute any of its own peoples or those of any no threatening nation.

2. Never use immigration politically to import people who vote for you, your party or your politics, nor who hold religious or cultural values inimical to universal human rights.

3. Never allow irrational and destructive beliefs, or political corruption, or shortsighted agreements with other nations, hostile or friendly, usurp your nation’s goals for its general, sustainable prosperity and universal human rights.

4. Continually challenge the right of nations that do not respect universal human rights to participate in international political or cultural organizations that do.

5. Never harm the general environmental integrity of your nation. Never finance the national budget by relying on population growth beyond the humane carrying capacity of the nation, defined as the point before overpopulation begins to undermine both sustainability and a standard of living that allows all legal residents to have full universal human rights, including the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

6. Respect and defend the inalienable rights of humankind, as enumerated in your national constitution and amendments, as well as universal human rights, in that order, and not associate with those nations and people who do not respect the later.

7. Never legislate to resettle immigrants in mass as un integrated foreign communities into your nation, as it is an act of auto genocide, worsened further if said communities are actively hostile to universal human rights. Only individuals and nuclear families that pledge to respect universal human rights are permitted to immigrate, with the goal that they strengthen your nation.

8. Always use accurate facts and figures whenever addressing a constituency, and avoid substance less rhetoric, demagoguery or emotionalism.

9. No subject matter is permitted to be demonized, or turned into a “third rail,” but shall always be revisited when circumstances arise.

10. Never legislate policies that create dependent or elite classes of able-bodied citizens who are without economic or cultural value.

11. National borders are to be strengthened until the possibility of them being breached illegally is minimized and rare.

12. Illegal immigration disrupts economic and environmental planning, community well being, and national as well as local security, therefore, with rare exception, repatriation of unauthorized immigrants shall be carried out immediately upon positive identification, and foreign nations that are violating or neglecting the rights of their citizens or interfering in your nation’s immigration security, shall be vigorously challenged.

13. Never legislate policies based on an beliefs separated from reality or ignore the policies and practices of foreign nations, cultures, religions and ideologies that may threaten yours.

14. Do not violate your national constitution by distorting its language, but instead resolve matters for the better through citizen education or procedurally change the law as delineated by your constitution.

15. Your nation’s interests, as well as those of national enemies, shall be fully documented, and policy shall be created based on that knowledge, with the aim of strengthening your nation.

16. Do not make political parties more important than individuals or the good of the nation.

17. Violations of the above codes and others not enumerated here by an elected official or political appointee can result in any of the following, depending on the severity of the violation: loss of office, public shaming, prison, loss of citizenship.

18. It is vital that politicians and parliamentary secretaries do not by their conduct undermine public confidence in them or their government.

19. Politicians must be honest in their dealings and should not intentionally mislead the Parliament or the public.

20. Clarify what is required of parliamentarians in the exercise of their duties

21. Act as a public statement of the minimum standards of behavior that the public and the media can and should insist upon

22. Establish the Office of Commissioner for Ministerial and Parliamentary Ethics to enforce the Code

23. Allow any breaches of the Code to be reported to parliament by the Commissioner along with any appropriate disciplinary recommendations.

The establishment of such a Code is an important step towards increasing openness and accountability in political party and government processes. It would replace the current ministerial guide to conduct, which is not only insufficient to ensure that parliamentary ethical standards are of the highest order, but also inadequate to lift public trust in our system of government.

Chapter 7



In all other situations presented to respondents, where competence of a politician could be conflict with his / her ethical standing, respondents’ opinions were almost unanimous. Over three quarters of respondents would not vote for collaborators of the communist special service. It was also common to reject a candidate who tells lies in public, caused a road accident after drinking alcohol, has a criminal record or is addicted to alcohol, even if professional qualifications of this person are high. It should be stressed that the discussed moral requirements relate to the whole political class and they to the same extent concern the head of the state as members of parliament

The respondents’ declarations concerning the private sphere of politicians’ life: their
family situation or sexual preferences are differentiated first of all by the religiousness of respondents measured by the frequency of participation in religious practices. The more frequently a respondent takes part in religious practices, the more importance he/ she attaches to private life of politicians. Respondents’ expectations from politicians in this sphere are also modified by their socio-demographic characteristics. Generally speaking, young persons living in big cities and persons with higher occupational and material status require less from politicians with regard to meeting ethical and moral standards in their private life. Older respondents, inhabitants of villages, respondents with primary education and persons with the lowest income are stricter in this respect.

The code of conduct is meant to guide politicians on how they should conduct themselves as they prepare for the 2009 general election. The code of conduct says that intimidation in any form will not be permitted. No weapon of any kind should be brought to any public rally, meeting, march, motorcade or other demonstrations.

Party rallies, marches or other demonstrations should be held at least 500m away from each other if they are held at the same time of the day. Motorcades should strictly not pass through the rallies of other parties and they should refrain from utilizing public address systems, either fixed or mobile as this constitutes public nuisance.

Related Arts Paper: