Governance Requires Courage, Not Consensus: A Call for Independent Judgement

Good Governance Requires Courage, Not Consensus!

The Middle East conflict is exposing a hard truth about governance.

When risk rises, management companies, elite advisers, lawyers, and financiers move quickly to protect capital, structure exposure, and preserve wealth. Yet recent UN humanitarian reporting shows the escalation disrupting aid operations, medical evacuations, movement, and access to essential services. Wealth is always advised. The future rarely is.

This is exactly where Governance should matter.

The OECD is clear that sound governance is built on transparency, accountability, board responsibility, sustainability, resilience, market confidence, and financial stability. Paul Halpin  point is equally sharp. Governance does not fail only because of structure. It fails when the invisible architecture in the room weakens, when decision rights blur, and when the boundary between oversight and execution quietly collapses.

I know this from experience.

Well before one board meeting, a director called me as CEO to discuss a management issue. In private, he agreed with me unequivocally. But when the meeting started and he saw fellow board members taking a different line, he reversed himself instantly. No explanation. No defence of the position he had already supported. No courage.

To make it worse, two members were asleep during the meeting. When the motion came, they woke up just long enough to say yes.

That was the moment I understood how weak governance really works. Not always through open conflict, but through peer pressure, silence, and the quiet collapse of judgement.

And in Mauritius, we know another version of the same problem. The same familiar faces sit across multiple boards, moving from one meeting to the next, agreeing, approving, and collecting fees as if directorship itself were a profession. Then comes the diversity photograph. Different race. Different gender. Same network. Same university cohort. Same reflexes. Same “yes” men under different skins.

Strong boards need something else. Independent judgement. Heightened scrutiny without operational interference. Directors who protect the line between oversight and execution. Directors who can challenge constructively, resist peer pressure, and say no when the room wants an easy yes. That is what real governance looks like.