<p>Research ethics committees are often perceived by researchers as bureaucratic obstacles rather than as integral contributors to ethical research practice. Drawing on the authors’ dual roles as supervisors of research and ethics committee members, this commentary challenges that perception by situating ethics review within its historical, social, and political foundations. Tracing the evolution of modern research ethics from the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki tfvhrough landmark ethical failures such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the Cartwright Inquiry, the paper underscores the enduring necessity of independent ethical oversight. It further examines contemporary ethical challenges in global health research, particularly the exploitation of vulnerable populations in low- and middle-income countries, highlighting persistent inequities around consent, standards of care, and post-trial access. At the same time, the commentary critiques overly procedural approaches to ethics review that may inadvertently marginalise communities, silence participant voices, or constrain culturally responsive research. The paper argues for a shift from viewing ethics committees as gatekeepers to recognising them as collaborative stewards of ethical research. By foregrounding reflexivity, situational ethics, and participatory approaches, it calls for a reimagining of ethics review as a dynamic, co-creative process that supports inclusive, socially responsible, and ethically robust research across diverse contexts.</p>