Philippine President Benigno Aquino III may be in a muddle these days. He even forgot the name of Hong Kong Special Administration Region (SAR) Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying whom he had just met earlier this month.

When talking about the Manila hostage bloodbath three years ago, he stuck to his refusal to make an apology, which he argued would contradict Philippine culture.

Aquino is using "traditional culture" as a shield for his rejection to apologize to the hostage victims and their families, but this has actually damaged the reputation of Philippine culture which, if used as a fig leaf for uncivilized behavior, will make Filipinos feel ashamed.

All those who watched the live broadcast of the hostage-taking incident three years ago consider an apology from Philippine authorities a moral necessity.

On August 23, 2010, Rolando Mendoza, who had just been dismissed from the police on charges of robbery and extortion took a tourist bus from a Hong Kong travel agency hostage. The standoff between police and the ousted senior inspector lasted about 11 hours, causing eight deaths and seven injured in the end.

After the bloody hostage crisis, the families of the victims proposed four points to Philippine authorities: apology, compensation, the punishment of the officials involved and better measures for the safety of Hong Kong tourists.

During the past three years, the Hong Kong SAR government has also been urging the Philippine government to make an apology but Aquino declined to do so.

He gave a high-sounding explanation: "If we apologize, then it (means) that we are at fault as a country, as a government and as a people. And we pointed out that, from our perspective, there is one lone gunman responsible for this tragedy."

However, for those who watched the live broadcast of the deadly tragedy, the scenes did not only show the disgruntled gunman's cruelty and madness, but also the foolishness, inefficiency and inability of the Philippine police.

Even if the Philippine government doesn't hold the police accountable, it should make an official apology for having not guaranteed the safety of foreign tourists. Perhaps the term "apology" doesn't exist in Aquino's "cultural dictionary," but it does not mean that there is no such a word in Philippine culture.

At least 85 percent of Filipinos embrace Catholicism.

It is hard to believe a culture that supposedly lacks recognition for apologies for wrongdoings conforms to Catholic doctrines.

In 2000, the pope even apologized to the whole world on behalf of Catholicism for wrongdoings in the past 100 years.

Aquino's decline to apologize may indicate his concerns about other affairs. The Philippine media have provided an explanation: The president is afraid that the government must offer high compensation to the families of the victims after he made an apology.

Aquino also revealed his worry, saying "that has to be a consideration" and "then the idea also of compensation comes in."

It is no wonder if such remarks come from a stingy businessman, but quite rare for them to be uttered by a president.

Aquino's credibility has been put into question since people associated his refusal to apologize with his attitude toward the Huangyan Island dispute on the South China Sea.

Not long ago, the Philippine government was hyping up China supposedly conducting projects on Huangyan Island and trying to gain sympathy from international public opinion.

Nonetheless, it changed its tone by saying they have found that the concrete blocks on the island were not new, and some of them were covered crustaceans.

Aquino finally admitted it was "wrong" to say Chinese boats brought the concrete blocks for construction.

That a president could change his position at random reflects problems in a country's political body as well as his own governance ability. And we must be on high alert when dealing with such a nation.

The author is a senior editor with People's Daily. He is now stationed in Brazil. dinggang@globaltimes.com.cn