Every human being makes mistakes. No one, however wise or experienced, is immune from error. Civilisations have advanced not because people stopped making mistakes, but because they learnt to acknowledge them, correct them and move forward. That is why an apology occupies such an honoured place in every moral tradition. It is not merely a social courtesy; it is an act of accountability.

Yet, not every apology achieves that purpose.There are apologies that heal wounds, restore trust and bring closure. There are others that merely seek to silence criticism or defuse a controversy without addressing its substance. The difference between the two lies in one simple question: What exactly is the apology for?This question assumes particular importance when the apology comes from a public figure. Unlike ordinary citizens,  political leaders do not speak in a purely personal capacity. Their words often reflect the policies they defended, the decisions they implemented and the principles by which they governed. Consequently, when they apologise, the public is entitled to know precisely what they regret.

The recent controversy surrounding the statement of a senior PDP leader at Jantar Mantar brings this issue into sharp focus. The reported remarks comparing police action against protesters in Delhi with the security response to stone-pelting incidents in Kashmir during the years of militancy generated widespread criticism. Initially, it was suggested that the statement had been misunderstood. Later, an apology followed.The apology undoubtedly deserves........

© Greater Kashmir