This is a question that cropped up in my mind after reading recent media reports about the confessions of the former Jeddah mayor who is a suspect in the corrupt practices that led to the Jeddah floods turning into a terrible tragedy.

The former mayor, at the rank of a minister, and whose name is not mentioned in media reports, defended himself in his statement of confession by saying that he committed mistakes because a subordinate official misled him.

“I, the former mayor of Jeddah, confess and am fully aware of the consequences of my statement in that I was wrong in endorsing the documents presented to me by the undersecretary at the mayor’s office with regard to the construction of a concrete tunnel in the flood course basin in Quwaizah and giving permission to build houses in that location during my tenure,” said his statement.

The ex-mayor added that he did not deny his failure to read the relevant regulations and instructions.

“If I had read the orders of the higher authorities I would not have allowed the undersecretary to issue permission for residential plots in the flood course. The undersecretary also supplied false information with the intention of deliberately misleading me. I was not aware of his hidden schemes,” the ex-mayor said.

He also expressed grief at committing such a huge mistake, although he said it was not deliberate. “I apologize to the rulers for being ignorant of the royal orders. I affirm that my wrongdoing was not intended to kill people or destroy properties.”

Let me go back to the question I put at the beginning. I don’t think that any high official will have to be tested on the regulations governing his particular administration or portfolio.

However, there is another significant question. It concerns the trend that officials are allegedly being misled.

This factor is something that the legal authorities should examine. The investigators should study the material profits gained by the ex-mayor by issuing illegal approvals. They should also probe the depth of the influence of such profits on not taking legally correct decisions.

Deception is a serious act that needs to be cracked down on. Those who have vested interests in continuing certain projects will supply imprecise information or conceal certain information. They may also present a dangerous situation as ideal to the decision makers.

They may even issue press statements or write articles to promote their schemes. Another question that crops up in this context is — can any negative situation be defined as a misleading situation?