Examine the ethical dilemmas involved in state actions that prioritise external image over the dignity of vulnerable citizens.

Governance faces a hard choice when the duty to project a confident national image collides with the constitutional promise of dignity under the Preamble and Article 21. The screening of Delhi's Coolie Camp (Vasant Vihar) behind 10-foot sheets before the 18th BRICS Summit (12–13 September 2026) [1][4] makes this dilemma concrete.

Nature of the dilemma

• Ends versus means: a utilitarian gain — smooth optics for visiting dignitaries — is purchased by treating residents as objects to be managed, violating the Kantian rule that persons are ends in themselves.
• Loyalty conflict: the official owes obedience to protocol and security directives, yet also owes empathy and compassion to citizens on the route.
• Symbolism versus substance: concealment relieves the visible symptom while leaving deprivation untouched, a transparency deficit towards both citizens and guests.

Ethical costs when image wins

• Denial of dignity: residents, many of them sanitation workers who service the city, reported being treated as something to hide [1].
• Non-maleficence breached: entry and exit to the covered stretch were restricted to two points, imposing real hardship [1].
• Routinisation of wrong: the same settlement was curtained green during the G-20 Summit of 2023, showing an administrative habit rather than a one-off lapse [1].

Competing legitimate claims

• Route security and protocol are genuine public duties, and screening is a lesser harm than forced eviction — but necessity must be proportionate and time-bound, not a substitute for welfare.

Resolving it

• Prefer substantive remedies: completing DUSIB's demand survey of Jhuggi-Jhopri Clusters and in-situ rehabilitation under PMAY-U converts optics spending into permanent shelter [2].
• Consult residents; upgrade water, sanitation and facades instead of hiding them.

Ethical administration is judged by how it treats those least able to object. Summit preparation and slum upgradation are complementary, not rival, goals; anchoring both in the state's own pledge of human-centric, inclusive development [3] would make India's external image a reflection of dignity secured rather than of poverty concealed.