Bad apology is worse than no apology

Asked about his apology, Joseph Muscat said he finds no problem in apologising for the party's past mistakes. On the other hand, however, the Nationalist Party ought to apologise for its mistakes during the 1960s when many families were hurt (The Times, June 11, 2008).

Dr Muscat reiterated his apologetic refrain referring to the violence known as the Black Monday events by socialist thugs during a speech on journalism.

The above instances inspire me to express my view of what it takes to give a true apology. I believe that a half-hearted or insincere apology is worse than not apologising at all because recipients feel even more insulted. A good apology is like an antibiotic; a bad apology is like rubbing salt in the wound.

In my opinion Dr Muscat's above referred to apologies are bad apologies. He is not giving an apology, but actually he is asking for one.

The proper apology must have three conditions, namely: 1) What I did was wrong; 2) I feel badly that I hurt you; 3) How do I make it better? Dr Muscat's apology evidently lacks the three elements that together make a true apology.

The MLP Leader is quoted as saying that he has "no problem" in apologising. Well! All those who were hurt by the MLP's past offences/harassment are owed a true apology.

He is still in time, if he is willing, to find the right opportunity and the proper way to give it. Only then we, the hurt recipients, will be put in a position not to find a problem to forgive. And only then could the MLP be in a position to redeem itself in spite of the facts that cannot be erased.