Today, many motorcyclists beat the red light without consideration for law and order. One could of course consider this to be entrepreneurial (risk-based) riding; but then it must be made legal and public policy for all motorcyclists.

\"\"

They must then be told it is acceptable for them to take such risks and if all other motorists do not mind this initiative.

But, my greater concern is that such a violation happens almost at every light, every day, and every time.

Today also, many school children ride motorcycles without wearing crash helmets, and teachers, parents, and school authorities do not seem to bother either.

Today also, in many local jurisdictions, people make their own laws about what is right, good and okay, without impunity, and we have a society that has learned to close one eye on all such misdemeanours.

I have experienced an incident of a motorist driving the wrong way on a one-way street, but was told to close one eye about it. The challenge for all of us is whether we do something about such wrongdoing or collude and support this close-one-eye culture, which is becoming endemic in Malaysia.

Christian theology asserts that all man has sinned, and therefore has the inherent and innate human capacity for wrongdoing. But, is not the deeper question, ‘Why does a person break the law?’ in given circumstances.  Let us review what I really mean.

Once, I drove through a left-turn red light which was newly installed in my neighbourhood because it was never really needed. A police officer stopped me and I explained that, for 22 years we have never had traffic lights there, and there is really no need for one, even now.

He listened and waited to observe the next driver who also did not stop. He then waved me on and I did not get a violation ticket. MBPJ is the agency which should be ticketed for its wrong action; not the residents who have never had to stop for non-traffic!

On another occasion I was speeding to Hospital UKM after the son-in-law of my best friend called to say that he was nearing his last breath. I used the emergency lane along the Federal Highway to move faster, and was stopped by the police. I explained why I had to use the emergency lane and he accepted my reason and let me go.

Forgiveness is never closing one eye over a wrongdoing; it is always having the actor admitting wrongdoing, and then being allowing them to go ahead without a violation ticket, or some other form of punishment, if there is awareness of violation or non-violation.

\"\"

Forgiveness can only be accorded when wrongdoing is recognised by the defaulter but also when the desire for right-doing is also equally recognised by the authorities, whether the police or MBPJ. Conscious, conscientious wrongdoing as a habit is what I am against, but we would never know until there is admission of wrongdoing. Only then can we forgive.

Therefore when motorcyclists are habitual violators and school children are perpetual violators in school uniform, we are actually laying the foundation for a nation-state which slowly but surely closes one eye to all kinds of wrongdoing.

One day, we will wake up to find out that lies are truths and traditional truths have become lies.

A minister and his son

I can give quite easily give many reasons why a father should never employ his son within the same office unless it is a family business operation.  In public services, there is a clear policy and guidelines that a relation should never work under the jurisdiction of another.

The same is true of medical practitioners; they cannot treat any close relatives because of the potential for lack of professional objectivity in their capacity to make good decisions.

Therefore, I find it rather amusing that the minister who was in charge of Parliament, which is our ultimate institution for good national governance, cannot see what he has done wrong. To add insult to injury, even the prime minister and opposition MPs agree.

\"\"

The minister’s argument – ‘I am paying out of my own pocket for the cost of his work or programme’ – is both an irrational and a stupid excuse.  

Excuse me, Minister, but in your office, there are corridor discussions of government and public policies and there are both sulit and rahsia files lying all over every office.

What if your non-qualified son and non-gazetted officer accidentally stumbles upon these while he is in your room? Who do we hold responsible when government secrets are leaked? For that matter, who pays for his table and chair and does he not use the ministry’s computer system? Have you never yet heard of Edward Snowden?

Parliament is the highest accountable body in our country. It is only in Parliament that the members of parliament have a right to ask any question of interest to them or on behalf of their constituency to obtain an answer from the chief executive of the government, our prime minister or his cabinet of ministers.

\"\"

n Sim (left) has asked this of the home minister: ‘I have asked why, between 2011 and 2013, there has been a huge increase of 46.43 percent in the number of personnel in SB (including the Special Task Force) or an addition of 2,423 officers while the more critical crime-fighting Criminal Investigation Department (CID) only gets an additional 583 officers, a mere 6.24 percent rise  in the strength of personnel.’

Rather curiously, the minister has not yet responded and, I suspect, may not even give an answer, because he does not know the answer since he was not there at the material time.

Now, as a columnist and a former public servant, I too want the chief secretary to the government and the Finance Ministry secretary-general to respond, if the answer is beyond the jurisdiction of the politicians. It is the budget committee of each ministry which is directly responsible and accountable under the jurisdiction of budget review officer for such decisions.

Lawlessness will prevail so long as citizens all agree (without really agreeing) that ‘we all close an eye to wrongdoing’. Where wrong prevails, obvious correction attempts must be made and reasons for the violation sought; but when these are not forthcoming, social etiquette requires that citizens speak up against wrongdoing. Otherwise, like the police, we too are selectively pursuing non-wrongs, all in the name of wrongdoing.  

But, always remember that God is watching. And one definition of integrity is doing the right things even when no one is watching.