Suspects cannot remain in public office

IN recent times, the practice of retaining accused individuals facing serious charges in public offices has come under scrutiny.
While the decision to allow them to continue in their roles was due to various considerations, including the commonly “innocent until proven guilty”, this approach has significant drawbacks with far-reaching consequences.
By allowing accused leaders to remain in office leads to a fundamental erosion of trust in government.
This undermines the very foundation of democracy as it conveys a message that those in power are exempted from accountability. This raises doubt among the populace, and the questions on fairness and integrity of the system.
The retention of accused individuals compromises the pursuit of justice.
Their continued presence in office could enable them to manipulate investigations, tamper with evidence, or exert undue influence on legal proceedings, thus subverting the course of justice and weakening the rule of law.
Failing to take decisive actions against accused leaders sets a harmful precedent that misconduct at high levels of government will go unpunished.

Such unethical behaviours will encourage a culture of corruption and impunity, creating a toxic environment that corrodes the moral fabric of society.
The negative impact on governance cannot be overstated.
Accused leaders, preoccupied with their legal woes, will neglect their official responsibilities, leading to poor decision-making, lack of focus on crucial issues and, ultimately, ineffective governance that fails to serve the interest of the public.
Allowing accused individuals to remain in office perpetuates a cycle of harm to society by condoning a culture of impunity and signalling a disregard for ethical standards and accountability.
It is important for governments and institutions to consider these serious disadvantages and prioritise the values of transparency, justice, and good governance in their decision-making processes.

Nelson Wandi