A Quote by Mo Ibrahim

The Ibrahim Index is a tool to hold governments to account and frame the debate about how we are governed. — © Mo Ibrahim
The Ibrahim Index is a tool to hold governments to account and frame the debate about how we are governed.
Citizens need to know how their countries are being run so that they can hold governments and big business to account.
God will himself one day hold all humans, and all human governments, to account, but the church has the responsibility in the present to speak words of truth and judgment in advance of that final holding-to-account.
Were it part of our everyday education and comment that the corporation is an instrument for the exercise of power, that it belongs to the process by which we are governed, there would then be debate on how that power is used and how it might be made subordinate to the public will and need. This debate is avoided by propagating the myth that the power does not exist.
People need to be able to read what their rights are, to be able to participate and hold their governments to account.
The rank of a university is similar to an index number say like the NASDAQ index. I don't understand how you can take an institution like Harvard, Stanford, or Michigan, and represent it by an index number. The concept makes no sense.
My role as a broadcast journalist is to analyse information and pass it on to the community. And also as a journalist to hold governments to account.
Once one accepts the premise of the Declaration of Independence - that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed" - it follows that the governed must, in order to exercise their right of consent, have full freedom of expression.
How you frame a debate is very important. When you call someone an 'illegal alien,' you've already stacked the deck against them.
Governments must be conformable to the nature of the governed; governments are even a result of that nature.
My fundamental concern about the role of faith groups in providing social provision is democratic: how do we hold them to account? To whom are they responsible? How do we, the public, the recipients of welfare, punish them if they make mistakes or become corrupt?
Most of the debate over the cultures of death and life is about process. The debate focuses on the technology available to determine how we prolong life and how and when we end it.
Governmental intervention and personal responsibility are not mutually exclusive issues, but they do frame a 'do it ourselves' vs. 'what are you doing for us' debate. For the black community, that's a debate that's been raging at least as far back as the W.E.B. Du Bois, Booker T. Washington philosophical grudge matches.
These are issues we've been grappling with since the Constitution was written: how you hold your government to account for its words and deeds. It's all about power and the abuse of power.
Today, everything I do from morning meditation on - eating breakfast, going for a walk, writing, reading, even recreation - is governed by one purpose only: how to give the very best account of my life that I can in the service of all.
Hume's paradox does hold: power is in the hands of the governed. If they refuse to accept it, you're in trouble, no matter how many guns you have.
We pretend that the debate about genetically modified crops is a debate about science when the reality is, actually, that the science is very clear. It is really a debate about values.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!