The reality is that politicians, as public figures, can no longer ask for privacy. After all, no one asked them to be politicians and they cannot cherry-pick their choice of publicity.

WELL, it was only a matter of time before this came out. Images of Malaysian politicians wearing luxury watches, as well as cheap ones as a comparison, have gone viral on social media.

Those named have chosen to remain quiet except for Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who was clearly peeved.

He defended his purchase of three luxury watches allegedly worth more than RM1mil in total, saying he was a corporate figure before becoming a politician.

The Umno vice-president questioned the need for the Malaysian Crime Watch Task Force (MyWatch) to monitor watches worn by politicians.

Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Ahmad Maslan also quickly defended himself on Twitter although he wasn’t highlighted prominently in the expose, saying he has never owned a RM40,000 Rolex Submariner.

Even Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin were implicated in the watch issue.

Social media has become both a boon and bane to politicians everywhere. From their choice of restaurants to how they shop and what they want to buy, politicians and their spouses have never been so openly scrutinised.

It is no longer about the paparazzi or press. Anyone who has a smartphone is able to capture anyone else in a public place and post that image online.

The reality is that politicians, as public figures, can no longer ask for privacy. Public figures only have public lives. After all, no one asked them to be politicians and they cannot cherry-pick their choice of publicity.

Politicians with expensive watches are now the talking point of the Malaysian public, but they are not the first to come under such scrutiny.

Four years ago, Chinese officials wearing such high-end watches found themselves being watched. An official of ministerial rank earned only RM50,000 a year, so questions were raised on how certain officials could afford luxury brands like Rolex, Piaget, Omega and Cartier, which probably cost more than half of their annual income.

Those caught in the exposé by the Chinese Internet activist included China’s railways minister Sheng Guangzu.

Among the reported glittering timepieces identified by an activist when he zoomed in for a closer look at Sheng’s wrist were a Rolex Oyster Perpetual DateJust, a Piaget Altiplano and an Omega Constellation.

Together, these three timepieces were worth a total of 400,000 yuan (RM237,000).

Ironically, Sheng took over the job after the previous railways minister Liu Zhijun was arrested and investigated for corruption, with reports in China’s official media alleging that he had taken up to RM500mil in bribes.

Sheng lost his job after the ministry was dismantled.

Nearer to home, Indonesia’s military commander was photographed wearing a watch from Richard Mille brand’s Filipe Massa collection, reportedly worth more than RM360,000.

Gen Moeldoko quickly refuted the accusation, saying the timepiece was actually a cheap Chinese fake worth only five million rupiah (RM1,400).

To prove his point, he removed his watch and showed it to reporters who were covering his press conference, saying “this is a Chinese-made fake watch… how could such a watch be original?” while slamming the watch onto the floor.

A Singapore website had also shown photos of Moeldoko wearing other luxury watches.

Moeldoko appeared unnecessarily defensive as he actually comes from a very wealthy family with numerous land assets.

In fact, he had reported to the anti-graft commission last year that he had assets worth about 36 billion rupiah (RM10mil).

Back to Malaysia. There must be something about watches, especially for male politicians. There could be a correlation between an expensive watch and the male ego but for sure, a watch can land many male politicians into trouble.

Well, it happened to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in that infamous sex video involving a man resembling the opposition politician.

To refresh our memories, a mysterious video purportedly featuring Anwar surfaced in Kuala Lumpur in 2011, allegedly showing him having sex with a Chinese woman believed to be a prostitute.

The trio of Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik, Datuk Shazryl Eskay and Datuk Shuib Lazim, who referred to themselves as “Datuk T”, showed the video to some members of the press, including this writer, at Carcosa Seri Negara.

The single luxurious fashion accessory that was mentioned was an Omega watch said to be worn by the man resembling Anwar on that day.

One of the Datuk Ts was allegedly asked by the person in the video to pick up the watch, which the latter had accidentally left in the room.

That Datuk T, who is actually Shazryl Eskay, claimed to have the watch in his possession before handing it to the police for further investigation.

Of course, Anwar was challenged to reproduce the infamous Omega watch but he denied that he was the man in the video.

Anwar’s wife Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail has insisted she has in her possession the expensive watch, which some said was a gift from a Saudi Arabian royal family burnished with a royal crest, but until now, no one has seen it.

While Malaysians do not expect our politicians to live like paupers or lead a pretentious life of poverty, what most of us find hard to swallow is the flaunting of wealth. Such a blatant show of extravagance will certainly not go down well with most Malaysians struggling with their daily lives.

Malaysians already find it hard to understand why many of our politicians must go everywhere with an entourage – don’t these government officials or party leaders have work to do?

If only they could emulate the likes of Minister of International Trade and Industry Datuk Mustapa Mohamed and Ministers in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Wahid Omar and Datuk Seri Idris Jala, who are all so simply down to earth.

Travellers taking the ERL from KL Sentral to KLIA have often seen Mustapa travelling alone with no hangers-on.

The reality is that political leaders are being watched closely – not just them, but also their spouses and children. And it is not just about what they indulge in, but also their behaviour.

Our leaders need to stay connected to ordinary Malaysians. They need to be sensitive so that they can understand fully how most of us cope on a daily basis.

A notice pasted on wall stating 10% service charge and 6% GST at a restaurant in Kuala Lumpur. AZHAR MAHFOF/The Star

We want politicians who understand what real Malaysians have to put up with every day, and to help up deal with them.

GET real – real Malaysians talk about the further increase in the cost of living since the Goods and Services Tax was implemented two weeks ago.

We are at the adjustment stage as we try to come to terms with the changes that are affecting our daily lives.

We are definitely looking at the bill more closely. Even if we are prepared for the 6% GST to show up, we grumble why we have to pay 10% for service charge as well.

We know the GST is supposed to go to the government coffers, but we are not sure if the service charge is going straight into the pockets of the restaurant owners or to the workers who should get the money. Some of us may also have a sneaky suspicion if the GST will actually go where it is supposed to go.

Okay, we admit we do not have a tipping culture, and we have to be “forced” to give service tax. But at the same time, let’s admit that in most cases, there is no quality service from most restaurant helpers.

We now check our receipts more carefully because we do not want any extra charges to show up. Let’s get real. We are all affected by the rising cost of living.

At roadside stalls, where no GST is charged, we also notice that the food portion has shrunk or the price has gone up slightly. Yes, even these stallholders need to earn more to make ends meet.

This is what most Malaysians talk about in their daily conversations. If our politicians and bureaucrats think these are all made up, then they are either in self-denial or living on another planet, which means they really deserve to be sacked from their jobs.

Stop waiting for just good news which you only want to hear. If you want real feedback, talk to real people, not apple polishers or opportunists.

The typical Malaysian wage-earner cannot escape the taxman as everything is deducted at source. So there is always a gap between the actual salary and the take-home pay after all the statutory deductions.

Not only does he have to juggle his expenses, he also cannot be sure about the annual increment exercise. After all, employers also can cite reasons like weak market sentiments to reduce the increments and bonuses.

Middle class Malaysians are the worst off. They are truly squeezed in the middle. They can’t qualify for BR1M and they are too poor to live the life of the rich and famous of Bangsar.

Our leaders can rattle off statistics to convince us how well the Malaysian econo­my is doing but we are sorry to tell them that the trickle-down effects are not being felt at all. Most of us are not reporting roaring businesses. Try talking to those in the retail business especially.

So the last thing we are interested in are squabbling politicians. They include retired politicians who just can’t accept the fact that they are retired. And then there are those still in service who really need to get special lessons on how to provide convincing and truthful answers during interviews.

Either way, Malaysians are not amused with the daily overdose of news about murder conspiracies, alleged missing money and plots to overthrow the leader­ship – not when many of us have to put food on the table and figure out where the money should go this month.

But of course, if we Malaysians think that the cost of living is our biggest issue, PAS Members of Parliament think otherwise.

Nothing matters to them more than to push through the Private Member’s Bill to impose hudud law. It was at the top of the party’s biggest agenda but it didn’t happen, so most of them must have travelled back to the East Coast grumbling away. They have to wait until the next Parliament meeting. Good luck, try again.

Their next more important item, of course, is to prepare themselves for their coming party elections. Economic issues? That’s too difficult to understand and explain to the village folks. It doesn’t have emotional appeal and it will be difficult to grab the attention of the ceramah crowds.

And of course, it doesn’t help that the ringgit has shrunk. The cost of doing business has gone up and it has also become more expensive for those of us with children studying overseas.

If there’s any consolation, the price of petrol has just gone down a bit, but the hawkers have not reduced their prices since the last time the prices of crude oil went up. For many businesses, what goes up need not come down, never mind the law of gravity.

But just when we think our politicians on the opposite sides of the divide must disagree on everything, it is interesting to note that when it comes to increasing the allowances of our elected representatives, there is almost brotherly love and reconci­liation in the august hall from everyone. No need to call for block voting, all in favour, just say “aye”. It is amazing what money can do.

You know what else Malaysians want? We want our cops to get back to catching criminals, especially snatch thieves, instead of locking up journalists whose only crime was to file inaccurate articles.

We want our MPs to stop sleeping on the job and to actually take part in ­voting in Parliament instead of sneaking off somewhere with pathetic excuses.

We want politicians who understand what real Malaysians have to put up with every day, and to help us deal with them. These are issues that affect all of us, whatever our race or religion, and there is no need to see everything through political eyes. It should not be about helping only those who will vote for them.

Live your lives as we simple folks do. Be sensitive, listen to us. Don’t talk down to us. That is all we ask for – remember we elected you and not the other way around.

It’s time for the Education Ministry to send out a directive that religious conversion is strictly out of bounds in schools.

TEACHERS are hired to teach – that’s why they are called teachers. But in the case of two teachers in SMK Lutong in Miri, Sarawak, they went further and created a storm in the process.

The two, who are from the peninsula, have been taken out of the school and reassigned to desk jobs with immediate effect for allegedly converting a 13-year-old student to Islam. The Education Ministry has acted rightly and swiftly to put an end to the ugly episode.

We all know that attempting to convert any child below 18 years old to whatever religion without the parents’ consent is illegal.

It is time for the Education Ministry to send out a directive that religious conversion is strictly out of bounds in schools, where all the students are below the age of 18.

When cases like this happen, we should not simply transfer the teachers to another school, whether within the state, or even to another state. If these teachers are not clear as to their actual role within the confines of the school, then it would not be proper to place them anywhere near our schoolchildren.

That the girl involved came from a Chris­tian family only heightened the contro­versy, which has not only angered the predominantly Christian community in Sarawak, but also gone viral on social media.

Some already feel that the two teachers should be sacked immediately but as civil servants, they are also entitled to due process. According to media reports, they have been assigned to desk jobs at the Miri district education office, and the likelihood of them being transferred out of Sarawak is probably a foregone conclusion.

We must, however, be clear that they should not remain as teachers unless we can be sure that they are truly remorseful. Transferring them to another school is merely moving a problem elsewhere.

In February, a similar controversy arose in SMK Kinarut in Sabah when a 16-year-old schoolgirl was reportedly converted to Islam.

Media reports quoted Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Jalaluddin Abdul Rahman who said their inquiry showed the girl was still a Christian and had not converted although she practised the Islamic way.

Her father, Jilius Yapoo, correctly insisted that his daughter remains a Christian, and can only decide on her own religion after she turns 18. For now, the parents have decided to transfer her and her three siblings to SMK Tun Fuad Stephens, a mission school in Kiulu, some 40km from Kota Kinabalu.

Meanwhile, the errant ustazah and her husband, also a teacher, have been transferred to religious schools in Tuaran and Inanam.

These two cases appear to reinforce the fears among parents of the rural Christian communities in both Sabah and Sarawak over what might happen if they send their children to schools with hostel facilities in the urban areas.

Away from home, the parents need to be reassured that their children are going for an education, and not a new religion.

It may be natural for teachers, especially those who are religious, to share their beliefs. But to the parents, this is a form of indoctrination.

The teachers’ responsibility is to teach, and in the case of the hostel students, to also care for their well-being as these young students are away from home.

The children are still considered minors and the law is very clear that their religion is determined by their parents until they turn 18. Obviously, any teacher who seeks to influence a conversion has entered into forbidden territory. It is also a violation of the Child Protection Act, in case these teachers are not aware of it.

Worse still, if such cases involved teachers from the peninsula, as in the Sarawak case, there will also be major political ramifications.

The Federal Government has to listen carefully to the unhappiness that is now openly expressed by the substantial Christian community in these two states.

They have proven themselves to be consistent loyal supporters of the Barisan Nasional but their support must not be taken for granted.

It is a fact that the Malay-Muslim vote in itself will not be enough to keep the Barisan in power. The coalition needs the backing of the Sabahans and Sarawakians. The Barisan politicians, in particular those from Umno who are still ignorant and arrogant, should wake up to the reality.

Christian leaders in Sabah and Sarawak, if you listen to them, will tell you of their concerns over the Islamic resurgence, led by certain federal agencies, supposedly funded by the Federal Government, in the two states.

Rightly or wrongly, perception is everything. If it is not true, then efforts must be made to reassure the people there. They are the ones who can teach us about racial and religious harmony and how diversity is truly embraced by all. They certainly do not want to see the kind of fissures in the peninsula exported across the South China Sea.

We have also come to a point where Christians who bring up such issues are attacked on the Internet by groups and individuals whose words clearly breached the Sedition Act.

Liberals and moderates have also been called all sorts of names and threatened at times. It takes a tremendous amount of courage for them to speak up, especially when they may end up in jail as a result.

But that is how the racist and religious bullies work – they want the moderates to be cowed into silence. Let us be clear that Malaysia does not belong to them.

Islam is the official religion of this country. Malaysia is a predominantly Muslim country, and their numbers are expected to grow even faster due to their high fertility rate.

According to the latest study by Washington-based pollster Pew Research Center, Muslims will make up 72.4% (32.7 million) of Malaysia’s projected population of 45.2 million in 2050, compared to just 63.7% (18 million) of the 28.4 million population in 2010.

The report titled The Future of World Religions also revealed that Malaysian Christians will stay at just 9.4% of the population in the next 40 years, while all other religions will see their share of the populace shrinking. The biggest decline will be the Buddhists, who will make up an estimated 10.8% of the country’s population in 2050, compared to 17.7% in 2010.

With the dominant Muslim population, politics will also be played out differently. Already we can see how the push by PAS for the implementation of hudud has put Umno in a spot, since both depend on the same racial and religious voters.

The irony is that as much as some non-Malays dislike Umno, the party is probably the best hope to stop PAS from turning Malaysia into another Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iran.

If Malaysians, especially the urban Chinese, are not tactically careful or strategically clever, Malaysia will turn green – and it won’t be the Environment Party that wins, but PAS.

Likewise, Umno has to remember that it too needs the support of non-Malays. Trying to compete and outdo PAS all the time isn’t going to help.

Which brings us back to the point of why Sabah and Sarawak are so important. These two entities are not just two states within the federation. They were the ones who helped form Malaysia by merging with then Malaya and Singapore in 1963.

All of us, including the children in our schools, need to be reminded that without Sabah and Sarawak, there will be no Malaysia.

Trying to change the religious and political landscape of these two states, and in that process, stepping on the sensitivities of the people there, is plain stupidity.

But as we celebrate Easter Sunday today, forgive them we must – for they do not know what they are doing.

PAS President Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang is experienced enough to know that the implementation of hudud laws, even in Kelantan, would be ultra vires the Federal Constitution – but the signals have already been sent.

IT’S almost certain that the attempt by PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang to push for the implementation of hudud laws in Kelantan, via a private member’s bill, will not see the light of day in the current session of Parliament.

The word in Putrajaya is that Hadi will be told that the Dewan Rakyat is busy with other more urgent matters including several other bills in the current one-month session which ends on April 9.

In short, Hadi’s proposed bill to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act to synchronise it with the recently passed Syariah Criminal Code II 1993 (Amendment 2015) in Kelantan will not happen.

The statement by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak on the hudud issue is also long ready. It is understood that he wants to choose the right timing to state his stand.

It is obvious that Barisan Nasional is enjoying the daily mud-slinging between PAS and DAP, with PKR already indicating that it won’t support the PAS attempt.

But one thing is clear in Putrajaya – the implementation of hudud laws, even in Kelantan, would be ultra vires the Federal Constitution. Or, in simple language, it will go against the supreme law of the country.

PAS and the party’s array of lawyers can argue and try to interpret the laws to suit their stand but, in the end, any implementation of hudud would still need an amendment to the Federal Constitution, which requires a two-thirds majority.

Criminal laws are under the sole jurisdiction of the federal authorities. Even the criminal laws under the Kelantan enactment will need some form of enforcement authority and, as it stands, the only authority is the Royal Malaysian Police.

While the state religious authorities are empowered to enforce specific religious matters, they do not have any power with regard to criminal matters.

It is not the job of PAS leaders to play policemen. It is the job of the Royal Malaysian Police headed by Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar.

The policemen report to him and not PAS leaders and their state religious authorities, or any self-appointed moral police force.

Kelantan, or any state government for that matter, simply does not have the power or the right to introduce criminal laws. Only Parliament can legislate on such matters, and provide the punishment to go with the offences. That’s what the Penal Code is all about, which is a federal piece of legislation.

What PAS is trying to do, and they know that they cannot do it, is to usurp the power of Parliament.

The Syariah Criminal Code II 1993, which was amended recently, is being revived after 22 years. It has always been there, but the party did not push it at the federal level because it was realistic about its chances of getting enough MPs to support it.

So why the current push? Is it because PAS believes that it now has sufficient clout – together with other Muslim MPs from Umno, and possibly some from PKR – to get the stamp of approval?

Or is it simply because the PAS ulamaks, headed by Hadi, want to make sure that the party president gets re-elected in the coming PAS elections, and in the process strengthen their grip on the Islamist party?

Hadi is experienced enough to know that PAS will never be able to push it through – but the signals have already been sent.

PAS has always been consistent about its hudud and Islamic state ambitions, even if its Pakatan partners, DAP and PKR, seem to want to gloss over this clear fundamental divide. It is also clear that PAS wants to push harder now because of the changing demographics in the country.

The Chinese and Indian population is shrinking and so will its electorate base in the years to come. This is primarily the case in the peninsula. The only bastion against any Islamic agenda seems to be the non-Muslim bumiputra voters in Sabah and Sarawak, with their large number of Christians.

And these two states also control 56 of the 222 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, so they cannot be ignored.

But over in the peninsula, especially in the Malay heartland, Umno is handling the hudud issue cautiously as PAS campaigns along the line that “Hudud=Islam and Islam=Hudud” in the rural areas.

There is no doubt that the religious and conservative side of Islam is on the move and increasing its influence. And the reality is that only Umno, whether we like it or not, can hold back the push by PAS.

Unfortunately, the Chinese and Indian voters were convinced in the 2013 general elections by DAP that the Barisan Nasional government could be toppled at the federal level. In the process, they happily voted in PAS candidates without thinking of the consequences.

The saddest case was in Temerloh where incumbent MP Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah was voted out and replaced by PAS hardliner Nasrudin Hassan Tantawi. Saifuddin, known for his progressive views, is now an active advocate of moderation.

Now, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng has said that the party wants to sever ties with Hadi, but will keep its relations with PAS within the Pakatan Rakyat. In Sarawak, however, the state DAP has declared that it will not work with PAS any more.

For all that bravado, the reality is that PAS is actually inconsequential in Sarawak. But DAP appears to want to play safe at the national level by going after Hadi personally. But whether DAP wants to work with PAS or not is quite irrelevant, even if Hadi is not party president, because the Islamist party has clearly stated its goals.

Is DAP, again, in the next general election going to tell the Chinese voters to vote for PAS and pretend that all is well and fine? DAP has to make up its mind.

Likewise, the Prime Minister also needs to come out strongly on the issue.

Barisan cannot continue the tactical move of deferring any Private Member’s Bill on hudud at every parliament session. The charade has to stop and the best way is to say clearly that Malaysians will not and cannot accept hudud because it is unconstitutional.

This is a multi-racial and multi-religious country. It is a total fallacy and gross misrepresentation for Hadi and anyone, including some misguided Umno leaders, to believe that hudud laws do not affect non-Muslims. Of course, they will, make no mistake about it.

The implications to non-Muslims are clear enough. If anyone missed out on their possible impact in the original 1993 enactment, the amendments that were recently passed should convince them that there is no way hudud can be exclusively a Muslim issue.

Until now, we have not heard any convincing rebuttals from PAS or their supporters other than to be told to stay out of the debate.

It won’t be just Malaysia watching how we deal with Hadi but also the world. Keep our beloved Malaysia multi-racial, multi­cultural and multi-religious. We will not and must not let PAS dictate how we live our lives.

In a multi-racial and multi-religious country like Malaysia, hudud will impact the non-Muslims as well, whatever the assurances given so far.

IF we were to listen to Umno leader Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri and various PAS leaders, they would want us to believe that the hudud laws in Kelantan, if implemented, would not affect non-Muslims in Malaysia. So we should not be worried.

Correction – judging from Ismail’s tone, it was more of a warning to non-Muslims not to “interfere” in the issue. And this is the same person, who also happens to be a Minister, who has achieved notoriety for his controversial rantings recently.

We should be aware that there are some non-Muslim hardcore supporters of Pakatan Rakyat, because of their fanatical anger against the Barisan Nasional, who would also agree with the claim that it does not affect non-Muslims.

Despite such persistent claims that hudud does not affect the non-Muslims, we have to acknowledge the reality that in a multi-racial and multi-religious country like ours, there is absolutely no way that we can separate the Muslims and non-Muslims. Our daily interactions will be mainly for the good, but when crime covered by hudud is committed, there will invariably be cases when both parties are involved.

Which is why the questions will persist over what happens in such situations. In a rape case, for example, it remains unclear how it would be resolved if the victim is a non-Muslim and the perpetrator(s) are Muslims.

How does one get the four reputable Muslim witnesses to prove that the offence has been committed? What if only non-Muslims were witnesses to this horrible crime? How can they testify in a religious court, and how much weight will their evidence be given? And what if there are absolutely no witnesses involved, when it is just the word of the victim against the perpetrator?

These are questions that need to be answered properly, even by people like Ismail. Or should we just shut up and not interfere?

Just take a look at Section 41 of Kelantan’s Syariah Criminal Code (II) Enactment 1993 which states that it only permits direct evidence by just adult male Muslims. A “just” male Muslim is defined as a person who does whatever is required of him by Islam, avoids committing great sins, does not continuously commit lesser sins and also has a sense of honour.

Section 40(1) clearly states that there must be two or more witnesses for every hudud offence listed in the Code, except for adultery and sodomy, where the number of witnesses shall not be less than two.

Again, not only do you need two witnesses, but they must be “just, adult male Muslims.” These particular sections have already been widely discussed by many legal commentators, and even law students.

It should also be noted that while the current issue is with regard amendments being made to the original Enactment, and PAS’ plan to ensure its implementation by moving the Private Member’s Bill in Parliament, the issues have remained unresolved since 1993.

Back in 1993, we all probably saw it as a state issue which will probably not get a federal mandate to allow for its implementation. But now with a stronger PAS at the national level, and the realisation that the Islamist party could also get the support of other Muslim MPs, it is a different scenario altogether.

The problem is that our politicians are so eager to rush through these laws for their own political agenda that they are not interested in explaining to us how hudud would be carried out.

While they claim to pursue this cause in the name of God and Islam, we can’t help but suspect that politics is at play here with powerful religious arguments used to shut down critics and of course, non-Muslims. This is what non-Muslims fear most – that we cannot comment nor criticise anything that affects us because we are not Muslims.

Non-Muslims, if we were to listen to PAS and the likes of Ismail, should just stop debating or even talk about hudud laws.

But from a political perspective, non-Muslims are also responsible for the situation we are in today. The reality is that the DAP campaigned strongly for PAS in the 2013 general election. A huge number of non-Muslims, especially among the Chinese, voted for PAS even if the Islamist party never wavered from its stand that it wanted to set up an Islamic state.

There was only one DAP leader who consistently objected to it – the late Karpal Singh. The other DAP leaders simply glossed over this fundamental issue and pretended that it would never come to pass. And they were successful in convincing the Chinese voters to throw their support behind the PAS candidates and put more of them into Parliament and the various state assemblies.

It also has to be mentioned that the voting trend of the last two general elections was also due to the fact that most Malaysians want a good government. With so many allegations of corruption and abuse of power, it was felt that voting for the opposition would facilitate the creation of a two-party system which would help to keep all the politicians in check.

The so-called liberal stand by some PAS leaders during the election season also helped, but what we see in PAS today is that the conservative ulama leaders, who are also politicians, are wrestling to gain control of the party. Hudud is used to show that they are the real leaders – and this has to be carried out before the party elections.

In Umno, there are some party leaders who have given up on non-Muslim (principally also non-Malay) voters after the last elections. They feel let down and angry that these voters would rather vote for PAS than Umno, despite knowing what PAS stood for.

Against this political backdrop, some Umno grassroots members are saying they would rather gain the support of the Muslims, particularly Malays, even if that means, rightly or wrongly, playing the racial and religious cards. Their argument is that if some Chinese voters can work with and support PAS, why can’t Umno members do the same on an issue that affects them as Muslims and Malays.

Unfortunately, this has given rise to the impression that Umno and PAS are thinking alike but let us not forget that the Barisan Nasional, of which Umno is the dominant partner, is still a multi-racial coalition. Malaysia isn’t just about the Malay heartland in the peninsula but also Sabah and Sarawak, with its huge base of non-Muslim voters. These are the voters who have been loyal to Barisan and are crucial for the ruling coalition to remain in power.

One can understand their concerns when religion, as perceived in the peninsula, becomes the focus. They are watching closely how Umno would handle this issue, bearing in mind how the centre handled the few contentious cases relating to religion in these two states.

And we have to salute the Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem for his open-mindedness, especially his stand that he will never compromise on issues that could disrupt the racial and religious harmony of the people.

On the hudud, it has been reported that he has conveyed the party’s stand direct to the Barisan chairman.

If we need more convincing relating to how hudud affects non-Muslims, just look at some clauses in the recently passed Bill, now officially known as the Syariah Criminal Code II 1993 (Amendment 2015).

The PAS Kelantan government has reportedly retained three clauses that could subject non-Muslims to the Islamic penal law despite its assurance otherwise.

The media has reported that the Bill retained Clause 56, 57 and 58 under the “General” supplementary that provides for hudud and ta’zir (discretionary) punishments for anyone who conspires, plots, abets or assists in the act of a crime.

Clause 58 also provides that those found to have assisted in a sariqah (theft) offence would also be subject to the hudud punishment of amputation, it said.

Clause 56 states that “if the act of crime is perpetrated by a result of or caused by abetment, assistance, plotting or malicious planning, everyone involved in the planning, plotting, assisting or partaking in the malicious plan to perpetuate an act of crime shall be punished by imprisonment under ta’zir of not more than 10 years.”

It was further reported that Clause 57 states that “shall an act of crime be perpetrated by a group of individuals in order to realise a malicious plan, then every one of those individuals involved shall be deemed as guilty as the main perpetrator and shall be punished with imprisonment under ta’zir of not more than 10 years.”

According to some reports, section 46(1) states that circumstantial evidence will not be accepted in hudud offences, except for zina (adultery) and syurb (intoxication), leaving only oral evidence to be admissible.

No doubt the lawyers mounting the challenge to this law will be perusing every detail of the Enactment but for the ordinary people, they have very simple questions that need to be answered.

Certainly we want to know who will actually be enforcing such a law – the religious police or our police. And we have already seen how, even without hudud, the religious authorities conduct themselves in situations when both Muslims and non-Muslims are involved, like in the Borders case.

How will the syariah courts carry out the hearings and what is the view of the Attorney-General? Being the principal legal adviser in this country, he has to be concerned for the rights of all Malaysians. We would certainly like to hear his views and what kind of advice he will give to the federal government should this process go one step further and land in Parliament.

Let’s get the picture right – the hudud laws do affect the non-Muslims, so let’s not kid ourselves into believing otherwise.

I believe and trust in God but I will surely not trust politicians masquerading as theologians and using God’s name.

Speed is of the essence but the task force and Auditor-General must do a thorough investigation and leave no stone unturned in the controversial 1MDB issue.

IT looks like Malaysians would have to start learning about accounting terms from now on if they want to make sense of the many news reports on the controversial 1MDB issue.

The accusations and figures bandied around, purportedly involving billions of ringgit, have been mind-blowing to most Malaysians. It is simply beyond the grasp of most ordinary Malaysians who will never get to see that kind of money in their lifetime. After all, a recent report quoting the Employees Provident Fund revealed that 75% of its 14 million contributors, meaning those who are currently employed, earn less than RM2,000 a month.

Until now, the only time we hear of forensic is when we watch those popular TV police programmes showing investigators removing blood and hair samples at the scene where a crime has taken place.

Now we are hearing about forensic auditing, whereby the Auditor-General and a panel comprising staff from the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency and the police have been entrusted to investigate and give us the answers.

It must not be forgotten that this is on the order of the Prime Minister.

But the task force would need trained personnel with a strong accounting background, and not just any accountant but those equipped with forensic auditing skills. Those with legal and police experience won’t be good enough for this case.

That means going beyond looking at the numbers when examining the state of the company’s finances. They have to effectively reconstruct the books to look at what lurks beneath, just like what the police forensic team would do when they reconstruct a crime scene, where every piece of evidence has to come together to show them the real picture.

One report defined forensic auditing as the application of accounting methods to the tracking and collection of forensic evidence, usually for investigation and prosecution of criminal acts such as embezzlement or fraud.

With 1MDB, there have been allegations of criminal fraud, but these remain mere allegations. Pointing fingers is the easy part. Furthermore, what has been revealed so far relates mainly to an email trail among various individuals.

The purported exchange of email, as well as the content, will be vigorously challenged in any court of law.

From a layperson’s point of view, he will wonder if the name or names of a person or individuals implicated will actually show up on any document. Or will the perpetrators, if any, be smart enough to make sure their names won’t be there?

Certainly, one would be curious to also see the actual paper trail – documents and agreements which may be far too complex for the ordinary person to comprehend.

The task force will have to gather all such evidence first, before they use their forensic skills to determine if any criminal act, or acts, has or have been carried out. Of course, for most of us, all we want to know is who then is responsible.

Whether the 1MDB is a strategic development company or a sovereign fund, the fact remains that it is a wholly owned government entity and public money is involved.

A RM950mil standby credit has been granted to the company by the government. You can call it “facility” or “standby credit” but in simple language it is a loan. And the bottom line is that the money is public money.

The comprehensive audit of this high-powered task force would also need to look at the work done by the external auditors, considering that the company has had three different auditors in five years.

Deloitte, the current external auditor which was engaged by the fund in December 2013, is its third auditor. It replaced KPMG, which had taken over from Ernst & Young.

The reasons for KPMG’s departure remain unclear although 1MDB has contended that the auditor left on the grounds that it could not complete the accounts. KPMG has so far remained silent on the matter.

Malaysians are right to demand for answers and the Prime Minister has rightly called for a full investigation.

The composition of the task force itself, comprising wholly of government officers, may not satisfy the sceptics.

But let us give Auditor-General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang, who has proven himself to be a man of high integrity, the support to carry out the difficult task ahead. He will have to report his findings to Parliament in the end.

As my colleague, specialist editor N. Shanmugam wrote, “Amrin has to do a good job not only on paper. But he must also be seen as having done a good job, considering the various reports that have emerged.”

Another person who would figure prominently once the investigations are underway would be Public Accounts Committee chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan, an accountant who is also seen as another person of high integrity. His fellow Barisan Nasional MPs sometimes say he is “more opposition than the opposition”.

The PAC would need the Auditor-General’s Report as a basis to begin its own investigation into 1MDB, which has raked up RM42bil in debts since 2009.

The PAC chaired by Nur Jazlan, with DAP’s Dr Tan Seng Giaw as deputy, includes five Pakatan Rakyat MPs and six from the Barisan.

The PAC, by parliament tradition, has sufficient clout to call up any witness to get to the bottom of any financial issue involving public funds. The members will surely want to maintain its integrity when it starts its own probe.

Speed is of the essence but the task force and Auditor-General must do a thorough investigation and leave no stone unturned.

It would be better for 1MDB and the political leadership for things to clear up as soon as possible. Otherwise, the controversy will continue, especially in cyberspace where nothing is sacred and lies and half-truths will escape legal action. The Prime Minister has already filed a suit against an opposition MP.

Beyond the financial matters, the issue has become murky and tricky because the 1MDB controversy is also being used to settle political scores.

It’s a minefield out there when not enough is known accurately, or beyond what has been reported and whispered. These allegations may be unsubstantiated but if they remain unrebutted, then there would be serious implications. It is not a very smart way for the authorities to handle this delicate situation.

There is a need for 1MDB to answer these allegations head-on so that Malaysians can decide. Mere denials would not be good enough as Malaysians expect strong answers.

If it is merely bad business decisions or management incompetency, then we should ask for a management audit. Let’s keep an open mind.

The truth needs to be told and the truth will emerge eventually. But meanwhile, let the Auditor-General and task force carry out their work.

Malaysia has moved on, embracing and accepting the talents of women. The Grant Thornton International Business Report revealed that Malaysia has the highest number of women in the workforce – up to 40% – compared with other Asean countries.

I AM surrounded by women – in a positive way. Until a few years back, I was the only man in the house.

Now, besides my wife, four other females play a key role in my life – my mother-in-law, daughter, maid and my female poodle. Before my sister-in-law got married, she also lived with us.

These days, her two sons come to my house, which is like a daycare centre for my sister-in-law and her husband.

Both my wife and daughter are opinionated and strong-minded, even stubborn, in many ways. The days of submissive women are long over in Malaysia.

My 23-year-old daughter has set the record for being the first law graduate in three generations of Wongs, and is now chambering with a law firm.

The change in gender composition in my life has been really radical because I grew up without sisters, only three brothers.

It would have been nice to have a sister. I am the youngest in the family but I know my parents wanted a daughter too. In the 1960s, there was no scan to tell the sex of the child before birth, and so it was a lot of guessing and hoping.

Actually, my parents were so sure I would be a girl, a sort of wishful thinking, that they even had an English female name ready for me. That was what I was told, but my parents have never confirmed that little piece of information.

And so when I was born, it was just another son to my father who did not bother to turn up immediately at the midwife’s clinic in King Street, which is within walking distance of the old Star office in Penang.

My male-dominated life continued with my enrolment into St Xavier’s Institution for primary and secondary education. Except for Sixth Form, which is co-ed, SXI is an all-boys’ school.

I played football, spent plenty of time at the river near my home catching fish, and, until my hormones began raging during my teenage years, it was just the company of boys for me.

So, from an all-male home, except for my mum, I moved on to an all-female home in Kuala Lumpur. That’s how it changed.

In many ways, it also indicates how Malaysia has moved on, embracing and accepting the talents of women.

When I first joined The Star as a cub reporter, as the most junior journalist was known then, I was interviewed by then editor-in-chief Hng Hung Yong, the Cambridge and Harvard-trained journalist. He remains a journalist today, and certainly a respected one with his intellect.

That was just after I finished my Sixth Form exams, and I left The Star to continue my tertiary education at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. When I rejoined The Star after I graduated three years later, it was the newspaper’s first woman top editor Datuk Ng Poh Tip who interviewed me.

With her Masters degree in political science, she set new standards in the newspaper, demanding that journalists have better education and research abilities and not just be able to file stories. More women editors emerged by then, including Cheryl Dorall, who became Sunday Star editor in the 80s, the first woman to do so.

Fast forward 2015: The Star has changed. I have stopped counting the number of women editors and journalists in the company. In some cases, the men may think they are in charge but it’s actually the women who run the show, even if they refuse to admit it.

I have had the privilege of working under our first woman managing director Datin Linda Ngiam, who went on to become the first woman director of our media group. Both her roles have been records of sorts in the company’s history.

The Star Radio Group chief operating officer Kudsia Kahar, a well-known radio personality, is also a first, and our group’s Capital Radio remains the country’s only radio station dedicated to women, with huge listenership among professionals.

Of the over 1,500 staff in the company, over 40%, and for sure women, would play a bigger role in the years to come.

Our universities and colleges now comprise 60% to 70% of female student intake, and while some have expressed concern at the imbalance, I really do not see why a predominantly female ratio should be of concern.

Gender should not be an issue; what is more important should be the quality of the graduates our universities are producing. The Grant Thornton International Business Report (IBR) recently revealed that Malaysia has the highest number of women in the workforce – up to 40% – compared with other Asean countries. However, not everything in Malaysia is that rosy as the country reportedly has the lowest number of women occupying senior roles, at only 26%.

Grant Thornton said the data also showed that Malaysia was the third lowest globally to have women on the board of companies as chairman, chief executive officer, chief financial officer, executive and non-executive directors.

Malaysian employers must realise that gender diversity is good for business. Grant Thornton rightly pointed out that “it increases financial performance, enriches brand perception in the marketplace, improves problem-solving, enhances team and individual creativity, as well as boosts employee satisfaction and retention.”

In fact, racial diversity is also good for any company as it brings the best talent out, cutting across gender and race.

I am thankful to be born and living in Malaysia. I wouldn’t want to live in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or some conservative society where women are regarded as inferior by misguided males, some of whom use religious doctrines to keep their power.

Such men with their inferiority complex seem to have forgotten the importance of their mothers, grandmothers and sisters in bringing them up.

Then there are those who continue to blame women for their sexual urges, often citing their dressing as being provocative. Some rapists blame the women and try to play the role of victim instead, as in the numerous cases in India, especially in the rural areas where they are sadly deprived of outlets to release their frustrations.

The reality is, even in Malaysia, rape perpetrators are usually known, or even related, to the victims. Many of these cases take place in rural areas and the victims are dressed in conservative clothing.

PAS-ruled Kelantan, despite its strict religious façade, consistently ranks top in the country with reported rape cases and other social woes. The Internet is filled with statistics on the problems in the state.

The International Women’s Day theme for this year is “Make It Happen”, and certainly most right-minded Malaysians believe in making it happen for all our sisters. I don’t have one but for all women, you are my sisters! We will make it happen!

THE Chinese New Year mood is in the air. I have been eating too much, drinking too much and making my rounds of the festive visits to family members and friends.

In each of these visits, I have been asked to give my views on Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Sirul Azhar Umar and 1MDB. No one asked about the in-fighting in MIC.

I have given them the same answer: this is Chinese New Year. I have a life. I may be a political commentator but I am no expert.

Like everyone, I have made wrong assumptions – but also made correct predictions – on issues. Some of my comments have fallen flat on my face, especially when they turned out to be pretty horrible in the end, while some of my stands have been consistently correct, despite initial public ridicule.

But I am in a nostalgic mood. The last thing on my mind now, as I turn 54 years old in the next few months, are some politicians with super-inflated ego who think they are the smartest people on earth.

As I spend my time with friends and family members, I can’t help but feel thankful for the wonderful things we enjoy in Malaysia.

In Malaysia, we eat too much. Our problem is trying to reduce our weight as we watch on television news of countries at war and people who find their food, water and power supplies cut off.

This CNY, most of the women in our family are not eating rice. Feeling guilty about the lack of exercise but reluctant to give up certain food, I try to eat just half a bowl of rice. After all, how can one enjoy steamed fish in soya sauce without the rice!

And how can they even refuse to touch the prawns – purportedly because they do not want to use their hands to peel off the shell or that it is supposedly laden with cholesterol? Such poor excuse.

But most of all, I feel really blessed and spirited to receive so many greetings from my Malay and Indian friends. Many of them turned up for our CNY lunch in Chinese costume, adding more colour to the festival.

My good friend Datuk Azman Ujang sent his greetings from Mecca where he is performing his umrah, and I told him to pray for me and my family.

My favourite aunt, Sarah Abdullah, made sure her son, Abu Zarin from Sabah, sent his greetings to this uncle before the festival began.

And not forgetting my media colleagues, Aziz Ishak and Rozaman Ismail, who never fail to wish me well. We have certainly gone through plenty together as friends in the same trade. Thank you, Anbu, for being on the line daily sharing our hopes and aspirations for a better Malaysia.

There are also other auspicious reasons as I pen this column on the third day of Chinese New Year. I would have taken a break but my colleague Soo Ewe Jin, who edits this column, reminded me that I have never taken a break, and this column has appeared every Sunday, except on the Sundays that happened to be press holidays, since the first one appeared on Feb 23, 1997.

Today would be just one day short of the 18th anniversary of the On The Beat column. So there can never be a day off even during this festive season.

The very first paragraph I wrote on that day went like this: “I have a confession to make. On Valentine’s Day, I bought my wife three stalks of roses. Not that I am a romantic. I parted with RM40 for the flowers because I am a conformist.”

The article was appropriately headlined, “Declaring your love expensively.”

And I ended that column with another confession, “By the way, I have another confession. Feb 14 was also my wedding anniversary. Again it has nothing to do with my being romantic. It’s an unpardonable crime to forget one’s wedding anniversary. Nobody, even someone as absent-minded as me, could miss this ‘double celebration of a Valentine’s Day wedding anniversary’.”

So much has changed over the years. I realised that in the earlier years of this column, it was more light-hearted. I tried to add humour and I realised that being funny is much more difficult than serious – and worse, it’s not appreciated! But the column developed its own character that in some ways matched my career in journalism.

As I rose through the ranks, and took on more responsible positions, I had to be able to feel the pulse of the nation. Thus, my reflections on the issues of the day became more pronounced.

And in recent times, it looks like this column has been closely monitored by some groups who simply want to lodge police reports against me.

I have accepted this as part of the trade. Just as there are admirers, there will always be people who are angry with my comments.

So every Sunday and Monday, as I read my email, I get adoring as well as hate mail, with some bordering on racist tones.

But as I look back, I remind myself that I have always written purely from my point of view. I write about people and events the way I see it. I write about developments in this country that make me happy, and also about the developments that make me sad.

I have been making a tough stand against the rise of extremism and this has upset some people who still choose to see issues from a narrow racial perspective. But I believe moderation is the right approach.

I can’t help talking about my old teachers and friends of all races as I grow older, talking about the era in which we grew up.

Perhaps most of us went through English-medium schools, which were regarded as neutral ground compared to the present Chinese and Indian vernacular schools and Malay-majority national schools. Only the middle and upper classes are enjoying the private and international schools.

My good friend Keng Hooi often wonders about the whereabouts of our primary school friends – Rahim, Bakri, Tengku Rohiman and Habibul. Where are you? We do get the occasional text from Azmi!

Our country is rich because we are diverse. We may be different but we all know where our limits should be when it comes to our words and actions.

This Chinese New Year, I am glad the Prime Minister in his message reiterated that this diversity is what we must “celebrate, cherish and protect.”

“The lunar new year is one of the biggest celebrations in our country, as it signifies the turn of the Chinese calendar and the new beginning of a new chapter in life,” Najib said.

How true.

The celebrations will go on for 15 days, and I know I will be putting on weight with the many extra dinners over this period.

And over these meals, I realise that we Malaysians who care about this country share a common purpose. We really want this country to do well. We want less politicking and more efforts to be spent on the bread-and-butter issues that affect all of us.

Even as many moan about the state of affairs in Malaysia, all of us do acknowledge that we are truly blessed to be Malaysians.

My father has turned 91. He was born in Kuah, Langkawi. If you do not see his physical features, you would think you were talking to a Malay as he speaks with a thick northern Malay accent.

And my mum, who is 86, is a nyonya who still prefers her sarong. She remains the best cook, insisting on using the freshest items for her peranakan dishes.

Keep the Malaysia we know for its multi-ethnicity and appreciate its pluralism because it is an asset – this is a beautiful country, and we are truly blessed to be born here.

Then, now and forever.

ACCEPT responsibility and apologise. These two actions seem foreign, or, to put it stronger, alien, to our Malaysian leadership culture.

It is exceedingly difficult, almost impossible, for those in leadership positions to be willing to take the rap, admit to a wrong­doing or rectify an error.

And we are not just talking about politicians with their over-inflated egos who refuse to budge from their positions.

Even in the corporate world, the NGO fraternity, and also the religious institutions, few would bravely own up to mistakes, or concede that they could be wrong. Some simply choose to remain slaves to their own ideologies even if the whole world has changed.

Everyone makes mistakes. We are mere mortals after all. Decisions have to be made daily and we all know that not all decisions come out right. But even if we make bad decisions, we can always learn from such experiences to improve ourselves.

Elected representatives are humans too, even if some of us may wonder about their so-called human traits, or lack thereof.

Like everyone else, they will have lapses in judgment. In the heat of the moment, and when they face enormous pressure to respond, they can sometimes make remarks that will get them into deep trouble.

We have seen so many examples in our Dewan Rakyat, and while they can always get away by “withdrawing” their offensive remarks, the recalcitrant ones probably use this tactic to keep themselves in the news.

The astute politician, however, knows that he should never say anything in a fit of anger. In fact, he can always rely on the phrase, “I have no comment to make at this moment”, until things cool down.

But such politicians are rare. Most of them not only want to say something, but also want to share their instant wisdom on social media so that it can spread far and wide, whatever the consequences.

Once posted, there is no turning back. Even if one were to delete an offensive post, someone would have captured that moment in a screen-grab and make it go viral. Even if you are truly pissed off about some issue, it may be wiser to sleep over it before making your views public.

Let’s make this clear. If you tweet or post on your own Facebook account, you cannot blame anyone but yourself. You cannot even blame the press for misquoting you, since it is all there in black and white.

Even the ordinary people have learnt that an offensive or seditious post can have serious consequences because social media platforms are public.

You can set your privacy settings but the moment it is published, don’t be surprised if groups of people turn up at a police station to lodge a report against you. From Mr Nobody, you will become an instant celebrity.

Actually, if the brickbats start to fly, the most noble thing one can do is to own up, admit it was done in a moment of weakness, apologise and move on. Simply deleting the post after the fact can be construed as an admission on one’s part.

Those in prominent positions who now embrace the power of social media should take some lessons about crisis management.

Malaysian leaders, in all spheres of life from political to corporate, need to brush up their skills on how to manage crisis in today’s world. One has to understand social media ethics and manage public relations quite differently in a high-paced world.

For example, if a CEO learns that the products his company makes has a slight problem that may necessitate a recall, he can no longer afford to take his own sweet time to make a decision.

If someone posts about it on social media, he has to respond just as fast. He may have to immediately say sorry even if his lawyers tell him that saying sorry may create liability issues.

I like what life coach Audrey Marlene has to say about situations like this.

“We all like to feel important and have others have a high opinion of us. Some more than others develop an over-inflated view of themselves. These tendencies act to wrap us in what many call ‘denial’, which creates a false perception of self and the inability to accept the truth about us,” she writes.

“It then becomes painful to accept that mistakes are possible and when we make them the first reaction is to point the finger at someone else. We refuse to think objectively and accept any involvement for our actions. Taking responsibility can be a very painful thing to do.”

She goes on to say: “The inability to accept responsibility for our actions and behaviours is a result of insecurity. By taking responsibility one feels they are admitting to being weak, powerless, or an opportunity to lose the respect of others. It may cause one to feel they will lose their sense of value and importance.”

But until more Malaysian leaders learn to accept responsibility for their actions, they should be thankful that we Malaysians are quite a forgiving lot.

During Hari Raya, the “maaf zahir dan batin” practice is so wonderfully enshrined. All religions also emphasise forgiveness and tolerance. To err is human, and to forgive is divine, as we were taught from young.

Taking responsibility and admitting one’s mistake is not a sign of weakness. It can earn you even more respect from the wider public.

Only the insecure and unreasonable diehard followers will tell you to stand your ground, even when it is obviously shaky.

At the end of the day, accepting responsibility is a measure of one’s self-worth and the true sign of strength and courage, as one commentator puts it.

In Malaysia, we have seen how difficult it is for people to own up even if they are caught in the act, so to say.

A politician can be caught on video, not once but a few times, for the most scandalous acts but can still get away by denying it. And there will always be enough fans to swear that the person in the video cannot possibly be their idol.

The same line has been copied by other politicians and, more recently, by one preacher.

A lawyer can be filmed engaging in a questionable deal but he can get away by stating that there may be a physical resemblance, and the person may even sound like him, but of course it is not him.

This nation needs leaders who embrace humility and celebrate diversity. We need leaders who can see things objectively. And we also want them to be human and know how to say sorry.

Even if they slip up, no one will think too badly of them if they admit their errors and are sincere in their repentance. They should not try to wriggle themselves out of sticky situations or, worse, look for scapegoats.

Japanese linguist Namiko Abe said that “apologising is considered a virtue in Japan. Apologies show that a person takes responsibility and avoids blaming others. When one apologises and shows one’s remorse, the Japanese are more willing to forgive.”

Author Brian Koslow wrote, “the more you are willing to accept responsibility for your actions, the more credibility you will have.”

It is Chinese New Year and I wish all readers Gong Xi Fa Cai. I seek your forgiveness if anything said in this article has hurt anyone. I write simply to remind ourselves to learn to take responsibility, to apologise and to forgive. These are noble traits for all of us.