The Ridout Road saga has been dominating the news these days. There are some who perceive the news to be all about the general public being upset about ministers living lavishly. To be clear, that is not what the issue is all about. Most fair-minded individuals are not against ministers living in big houses if they can afford it. The crux of the matter is: these ministers who embarked on a journey to obtain rentals to their current habitation- did they received preferential treatment in this journey? Had a member from the general public possess the same intentions, would his or her journey be similar? One key factor in this debate has to do with conflict of interest. What was expressly stated by the minister himself is that the presence of a “possibility of a potential or perceived conflict of interest” existed in the beginning.
Under Section 3 of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, it is stipulated that “a Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”
In other words, politicians must not only be above reproach, they must be seen to be above reproach.
Imagine an estate agent who is marketing a condo unit with superb views for his client. In the midst of marketing the unit, he fell in love with it and decided to rent the unit for himself and thus gotten his wife to sign the rental contract. Here in lies the conflict of interest. It is in his client’s interest to rent the unit out in as high a price as possible. It is in his own interest to rent the unit in his wife’s name in as low a price as possible. The two interests are in conflict regardless of whether they are actual or perceived. By turning into a renter, the estate agent had brought about a conflict of interest situation and any fair-minded person would view it as such. One cannot sell for a client and also be the buyer without triggering a conflict of interest situation.
Is there a way out of this? Can a person “recuse” his way out of this while remaining as the interested party all this while? Social media is rife with varying opinions. Some say yes and some say no. No judgment shall be made here.
Some have opined that avoiding conflict of interest (actual or apparent) is an excessively burdensome undertaking. I’ll have to say that it is doable since the Bible expect no less from a follower of Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:22 says: “Abstain from all appearance of evil.” (KJV)
Long before the Ministerial Code of Conduct came into existence, the Holy Bible already established such wisdom for God’s people to abide by. Again, no problem with Christians enjoying luxurious items if they can afford it. 1 Timothy 6:17 says: “As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy.” (ESV)
Paul did not tell the rich to stop spending on big ticket items. The rich is free to enjoy their riches as long as they acknowledge God as their provider and not make an idol out of their riches. The call of 1 Thess. 5:22 is for all followers of Jesus to avoid not just actual evil but also the possibility of being perceived as committing evil. This Ridout road saga is a grim reminder to all of us believers that we too, are under a “ministerial code of conduct.” One that have been around for ages. One that applies directly to us all since we are all ministers of the gospel.