In 2005, the Parliament of India enacted the Right to Information Act, a law giving citizens of India access to central, state, and local government records. Under the law's provisions, citizens have the ability to request information regarding official acts from any public authority. Officials who refuse or delay requests are held responsible through fines or disciplinary action. Many individuals and organizations were involved in the lengthy and difficult process of getting this legislation enacted. This case focuses on one of these individuals, Aruna Roy, regarded by many observers as having played a key role in empowering citizens to exercise the democratic right to make their government transparent and accountable. It traces her background and the challenges she faced in developing her commitment to improving the lives of the poor and socially marginalized. HKS Case Number 1929.0

A high-ranking district administrator in India, upon taking office, is informed that his predecessor agreed to acquire a plot of land for a local jail. When he learns that the landowner is the wife of an influential local politician, he becomes suspicious and decides to inspect the property himself. Located in the middle of a forest, completely inaccessible to transport, and far from police headquarters, it becomes clear that the land acquisition is designed only to make someone rich at the district's expense. Meanwhile, the real needs of the district-to provide safe drinking water, prevent malaria, improve literacy, invest in employment programs, and wean local youth away from secessionist militancy-are slighted. The administrator decides to stall the acquisition, even while realizing that the effort may put his career, and his programs to help the district, at risk. The case recounts his escalating tactics, from bureaucratic trickery to deliberate deceit and destruction of a government document. It provides a vehicle for discussing the ethical duties of public officials confronted with systemic corruption-and possible strategies for dealing with it. HKS Case Number 1888.0

A high-ranking district administrator in India, upon taking office, is informed that his predecessor agreed to acquire a plot of land for a local jail. When he learns that the landowner is the wife of an influential local politician, he becomes suspicious and decides to inspect the property himself. Located in the middle of a forest, completely inaccessible to transport, and far from police headquarters, it becomes clear that the land acquisition is designed only to make someone rich at the district's expense. Meanwhile, the real needs of the district-to provide safe drinking water, prevent malaria, improve literacy, invest in employment programs, and wean local youth away from secessionist militancy-are slighted. The administrator decides to stall the acquisition, even while realizing that the effort may put his career, and his programs to help the district, at risk. The case recounts his escalating tactics, from bureaucratic trickery to deliberate deceit and destruction of a government document. It provides a vehicle for discussing the ethical duties of public officials confronted with systemic corruption-and possible strategies for dealing with it. HKS Case Number 1889.0

In a world of increasingly fluid boundaries, public and private managers often face ethical challenges that cross familiar geographical and cultural lines. This disguised case recounts the experience of a chemical engineer from Brazil who crosses gender lines to forge a successful career in the masculine world of the Latin American petrochemical industry. The central focus of the case is a project to construct a pipeline in Ecuador to carry crude oil from Indian territories in the Amazon to a delivery point on the Pacific coast. Because of her business acumen and skill in working with representatives of a multinational consortium, the protagonist becomes a project leader for her company-taking on managerial responsibilities even while being denied a managerial title. Her work goes well, until she decides to visit one of the Indian communities whose way of life is being disrupted by the pipeline project. The dramatic encounter with tribal members-including the ritual drinking of traditional chicha-produces a crisis of conscience that leads her to wonder whether her professional ambitions require willful indifference to the plight of indigenous cultures. HKS Case Number 1764.0

A high-ranking district administrator in India, upon taking office, is informed that his predecessor agreed to acquire a plot of land for a local jail. When he learns that the landowner is the wife of an influential local politician, he becomes suspicious and decides to inspect the property himself. Located in the middle of a forest, completely inaccessible to transport, and far from police headquarters, it becomes clear that the land acquisition is designed only to make someone rich at the district's expense. Meanwhile, the real needs of the district-to provide safe drinking water, prevent malaria, improve literacy, invest in employment programs, and wean local youth away from secessionist militancy-are slighted. The administrator decides to stall the acquisition, even while realizing that the effort may put his career, and his programs to help the district, at risk. The case recounts his escalating tactics, from bureaucratic trickery to deliberate deceit and destruction of a government document. It provides a vehicle for discussing the ethical duties of public officials confronted with systemic corruption-and possible strategies for dealing with it. HKS Case Number 1615.0

What would prompt an elected official to take on what appears to be a moral cause with little immediate political benefit? That is the implicit political ethics question raised by this case, which describes the somewhat quixotic, decade-long effort of Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy to block, through legislation, the export of so-called "unregistered" pesticides -- that is, agricultural chemicals that were not approved for sale in the United States. As chairman of the Senate Agricultural Committee when he began his crusade, Leahy sought to make reform of U.S. pesticide export policy a centerpiece of his tenure, notwithstanding the hostility of commercial interests with close ties to the committee and the indifference of the public. HKS Case Number 1583.0

This powerful first-person memoir-style case tells the story of a Western journalism teacher in post-war Cambodia where, amidst near-ubiquitous hardship and tragedy, she finds herself drawn to one individual tragedy-that of a woman she encounters in a hospital corridor. HKS Case Number 1561.0

The executive assistant to the Army Chief of Staff prepares the nomination forms for all Army officers eligible for promotion, which are then submitted to the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) for approval and later confirmation by the Senate. During the officer's tenure, a SASC investigation reveals that serious racial incidents have occurred at four military bases. In response, the SASC establishes new guidelines for the promotion process, requiring a disclosure statement outlining any involvement or allegations of involvement in racial incidents, whether substantiated or not. The statement must also include any incidents involving the nominee's subordinates. Although the officer and the Chief of Staff have developed a relationship of mutual respect and admiration, on this issue they disagree. The officer believes that all information should be supplied to the SASC as required. The Chief has utter disdain for the guidelines, since even unproven allegations must be reported, and thinks it is unreasonable to hold superiors accountable for subordinates. The officer wants to preserve his relationship with his superior, yet does not want to engage in any wrongdoing. Under pressure, he chooses a strategy of outward compliance to the guidelines while knowing that his reports will be altered by the Chief before their submission to the SASC. HKS Case Number 1458.0

When a Republican state representative in the Midwest decides not to seek re-election, he is approached by a politically active, successful farmer about running for the seat. He thinks the farmer would represent the moderate wing of the party effectively and decides to support his candidacy. In a conversation several months later, the candidate reveals that he is gay although conservative on gay issues, and asks the representative's advice on whether to reveal his sexual orientation to his campaign manager and supporters. The representative realizes that the advice he gives the candidate may shape the outcome of the election. He says that such an admission would make the campaign far more difficult, and that he thinks it is a personal issue that the candidate isn't obligated to reveal. The only other candidate in the primary is a previously unknown conservative openly opposed to what he calls the homosexual agenda. The moderate candidate runs a campaign focused on the issues, but three weeks before the primary his campaign manager resigns, having learned of the candidate's homosexuality and feeling betrayed at not being told. The candidate loses the primary by a small margin. HKS Case Number 1454.0