Connect with us

Features

Justice Minister Ali Sabry on what he’s trying to do

Published

on

Omnibus interview with Saman Indrajith

Justice Minister President’s Counsel Ali Sabry is known in the legal fraternity as among the most brilliant lawyers this country has seen in recent times. He has embarked on an ambitious plan to reform the legal system especially in respect of addressing law delays. He is confident that he could bring about the change and that will ultimately help this country and its people to reach their true potential, Minister Sabry said during an interview with The Sunday Island.

Excerpts:

 

Q: What is your assessment of the current political situation?

A:

In the current political situation, when it comes to party politics, the government is of course in a very strong position with its two thirds majority in parliament. Of course there are differences of opinion within the ruling party. That is how democracy works. But still in the government we are all united, compared to the opposition which is weak and not effective.

 

Q: The government came to power promising constitutional reforms. There were reports that the reforming process had commenced months back under your leadership. Would you like to comment on the current statusd of that process?

A:

On the instructions of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and with the approval of the cabinet we have appointed an 11-member committee led by President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva to report on constitutional changes. It is a committee with diverse opinions and representations of many religions and communities. There are jurists, legal luminaries, legal academics, and members of civil society, Buddhists, Catholics, Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. They have been given a mandate to study and examine past attempts to amend the constitutions, to consult the public, religious leaders and political parties and to come up with a draft constitution. They have been working very hard. I understand that last weekend they traveled to Kandy to meet some of the people there to get their opinions as a part of the consultative process. They will submit their first draft in March. It would be then presented to the Cabinet to decide on its passage through parliament.

 

Q: There is a strong opinion that constitutions since Independence have not been able to support building what is known as a unique Sri Lankan identity but instead contributed to promoting communal identities. Do you think that the new constitution would be able to do something different and help promote a pan-Sri Lankan identity?

A:

Ideally that should be the case. But you have to understand that this is a country with a great history based on Buddhism. So Buddhism has to be preserved and given the foremost of place as it has been the case in the 1972 and 1978 constitutions. By doing so it should ensure we respect other religions too. We can embrace good qualities of all our communities and create a Sri Lankan identity that is acceptable to 70 percent of the Sinhala Buddhists. In that case we must promote the brand of Buddhism known in this country for centuries, helping people celebrate each other not despise each other, creating an identity which will help each other. That’s the brand of Buddhism known to people of this country for a long period of time.

The worst done to the Muslim community has been done by those promoting the ideology of Taliban and other extremist groups. They profess a brand of Islam that true Islam is never known for. It is a militant and non-tolerant, a rigid brand. Opposed to that we have a history of Sri Lanka known for its religious tolerance and love of peace. For example while the whole world was hating Japan at the San Francisco summit, Mr. JR Jayewardene, representing this country, who helped them to open their eyes to reality by explaining the Buddhist value that hatred never ceases by hatred but would only cease by love, respect and mercy. Whenever there were disputes between nations in the region, Japan and China, India and China and India and Pakistan, Prime Minister Sirima Bandaranaike met with their leaders and diffused those tensions by professing Buddhist values. When all the powerful nations were trying to write off Palestine from the world map, Mahinda Rajapaksa stood up and supported them.

Those leaders could achieve peace because our society is based on values Gautama Buddha had preached such as equality; respect for each other’s dignity and love. That is the brand I think that we should promote once again. If that happens we will be truly representing ourselves as true ambassadors of this great country and great philosophy of Buddhism which nobody can oppose or go against. It is a choice for all Lankans right now. As a Muslim I hate Taleban Islam. They have inflicted the biggest damage on the Islamic faith. We do not want any extremism of any sort. Every religion preaches peace, harmony, respect and brotherhood. Having said so, Sri Lanka should be primarily a Sinhala Buddhist country. We have been respected by the world as being primarily a Sinhala Buddhist country in the 1960s and 1970s. We must get a Sri Lankan identity which embraces everyone, Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims so that all can feel proud and say that we, despite all our differences, are Sri Lankans. That is where I want to see this country going.

 

Q: There are news items quoting you of ambitious plans by the justice ministry to effect changes. According to some, the changes mean overhauling the system and that many archaic laws are being changed. How long do you think this would take?

A:

One of the main reasons that compelled me to take leave from the legal profession and enter politics was that the need to change the legal system. This system needs an overall change. In the World Bank’s ‘Ease of Doing Business in 2028’ world ranking we were at 112 out of 185 countries. In the index of ‘Enforcement of Contacts’ Sri Lanka was at 165 out of 189 countries because it takes such a long time to enforce a contract here. Countries such as Ethiopia, Rwanda are ranked better than us because their legal systems are more effective than ours. It is not about the independence of the judiciary per se. With regard to the independence of the judiciary I think we can be happy where Sri Lanka stands today irrespective of the few cases of which people are complaining. Independence of the judiciary itself is not everything. It has to be effective, efficient, time-tested, and affordable. That is what the rankings are about.

Before I started politics I was involved in legal reforms from the Bar Association as an executive committee member, as a treasurer then finally as the deputy president. We have a very strong strategy to look into all matters carefully. In one of our research results we found that Sri Lanka has 15 judges per one million population whereas advanced countries such as Germany and Canada have almost 200; countries like Singapore have more than 100 per million people whereas Malaysia and Thailand have 65 to 68 judges, even India has 20 judges per one million. We decided to increase the number of judges and started it from the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. More judges would be appointed to lower courts in the coming months.

In addition we started improving infrastructure of court houses countrywide. We have not yet been able to embrace the advantages made available to us by technology. Other countries have done that and digitalized their systems. We recently started the digitizing process. The Supreme Court started e-filing rules. Magistrate Courts and Court of Appeal commenced to hear bail applications online. High Courts now accept e-filing and the Court of Appeal commenced e-hearing. There is so much to be done but we hope we can complete this in four years time.

We are also planning to bring about amendments to many laws that had not been visited for many decades. For that purpose we have appointed three committees on criminal law, civil law and commercial law. Altogether around 20 committees are now working on different specialized areas of law. I am happy to say more than 150 highly respected lawyers are serving in those different committees and most of them serve voluntarily without taking any fee for their services. There is an expectation in our legal community that something is happening and they need to be part of it. I am very optimistic that we could transform this system. It will take some time for results.

In some matters we have been able to see the results. When I assumed duties the backlog of cases stuck at the Government Analyst’s Department was around 16,000. Now, we have almost finished most of those case analyses and by the end of March we finish clearing the backlog. In January, we set a very high target of turning out 4,828 reports. We achieved 104 percent. That was something unthinkable six months ago. I am sure that we can transform the system.

Q: There were reports that Sri Lanka Law College Student’s Union had been agitating for some time demanding that there were academic, infrastructure and welfare issues of students that have been overlooked. There were also reports that the president and secretary of the union met you recently with all those matters presented in writing. The students complain that what they witness is a game of passing buck between authorities. In what way you can solve their problems because it was also your college once.

A:

I have a huge respect, love and admiration for the Law College. It is a great place which has turned out Lankan leaders such as Presidents JR Jayewardene and Mahinda Rajapaksa. We need to preserve that place and maintain its standards and stature and independence. The Incorporated Council of Legal Education is an independent body. The Justice Minister can appoint few people to the council, but the majority is ex officio – the Chief Justice, two members of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, the Solicitor General, two members from the Bar Association of Sri Lanka and Secretary to the Ministry of Justice. It is an independent body and unfortunately there had been no funding from the government to the council for its functions. They have to meet their expenses with the funds collected as fees from the college. That is the problem.

I took over in August, and I did not want to remove serving members though some were appointed by the previous government. They are also respectable members of our profession. Though they have been appointed to the council by the previous minister, I did not want to be ungrateful and remove them in the middle of their terms. When their terms ended I appointed my representatives including Harsha Amarasekera, the Chairman of the Sampath Bank, Sanjeewa Jayawardena, Naveen Marapana, Sampath Mendis, all are President’s Counsels and Prof Camena Gunaratne and also the Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Colombo. I hope the new team will come together and study the situation and decide what is to be done. I agree the Law College needs to be upgraded and it has been long neglected in all aspects of its quality of education, infrastructure, welfare of students, extra-curricular activities, embracing technology etc. I am sure that his lordship, the Chief Justice and his Council will carefully re-look at problems and find a way to upgrade the Law College. I am ever willing to help.

 

Q: Many brilliant lawyers held the post of justice minister. Some of them after their stint in politics returned to the Bar not to be welcomed. For example it is said that when Felix Dias Bandaranaike returned to the bar after a stint in politics, the legal fraternity at Hulftsdorp considered him a ‘plague’. The fraternity including judges and other lawyers will keep in mind what the justice ministers do. How do you see your future?

A

: I do not have long term ambitions in politics. I want to positively contribute for the upliftment of our country. Some people misinterpret even a single word I may say. All my intentions are very pure. I have sacrificed a lot to come here. I firmly believe in a single Sri Lankan identity. I also firmly believe Sri Lankan Muslims should live and embrace Sri Lankan culture. There is a sub-Sri Lankan Muslim culture that is different to the Sinhala Buddhist culture. But it is a Sri Lankan Muslim culture. That has to be embraced. There is nothing for us to be afraid of each other. We can help each other. We must create that environment. That is one of the objectives in my coming to politics.

As I already told you I decided to come to politics because I want to see a change of system. I have seen the agony of clients and people because of the delays. On the other hand this country cannot reach its true potential when the justice system is in the lower slots of international rankings. As long as I am here I work 24 hours by seven. My staff in the ministry too work in the same manner. Those at the government analyst’s department worked many extra hours without even applying for overtime to clear the backlog of reports. I am so grateful to them because they work very hard. They work because they have felt something is happening and the whole bisiness is moving in the right direction.

All the officers in this ministry, I am so glad, are working to complete their tasks. Some of them are working even on Saturdays and Sundays. That means that they know that we have come here for a reason and we will transform this place. The ultimate beneficiary of this work is the general public.

We are interested in making the Sri Lankan legal system world class, to bring our rankings higher so ultimately that will contribute to the rule of law so people will be safe on the streets; that they do not need to wait for a long period of time to see justice being done. After completing this I will go back to my profession to practice law.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Trump-Xi meet more about economics rather than politics

Published

on

President Donald Trump meets President Xi Jinping in Beijing: Mutually beneficial ties aimed at. (CNN)

The fact that some of the US’ topmost figures in business, such as Tesla chief Elon Musk and major US chipmaker Jensen Huang of NVIDIA fame, occupied as nearly a prominent a position as President Donald Trump at the recent ‘historic and landmark’ visit by the latter to China underscores the continuing vital importance of business in US-China ties. Business seemed to outweigh politics to a considerable degree in importance during the visit although the political dimension in US-China ties appeared to be more ‘headline grabbing’.

To be sure, the political dimension cannot be downplayed. For very good reason China could be seen as holding the power balance somewhat evenly between East and West. The international politics commentator couldn’t be seen as overstating the case if he takes the position that China could exercise substantial influence over the East currently; that is Russia and Iran, in the main. The latter powers hold the key in the Eastern hemisphere to shaping international politics in the direction of further war or of influencing it towards a measure of peace.

For example, time and again China has prevented the West from ‘having its own way’, so to speak, in the UN Security Council, for instance, in respect of the ongoing conflicts involving Russia and Iran, by way of abstaining from voting or by vetoing declarations that it sees as deleterious. That is, China has been what could be seen as a ‘moderating influence’ in international politics thus far. It has helped to keep the power balance somewhat intact between East and West.

At present a meet is ongoing between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. This happened almost immediately after the Trump visit. Apparently, Beijing is in an effort to project itself as treating the US and Russia even-handedly while underscoring that it is no ‘special friend’ of the US or the West.

This effort at adopting a non-partisan stance on contentious questions in international politics is also seen in Beijing’s policy position on the Hormuz tangle and issues growing out of it. The Chinese authorities are quoted as saying in this regard, for instance, that China is for ‘a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire in the Middle East’.

Such a position has the effect of enhancing the perception that China is even-handed in its handling of divisive foreign policy posers. It is not openly anti-West nor is it weighing in with Iran and other Eastern actors that are opposed to the West in the West Asian theatre. A ‘comprehensive and lasting ceasefire’ implies that a solution needs to be arrived at that would be seen as fair by all quarters concerned.

On the highly sensitive Taiwan issue, President Xi was comparatively forthright during the Trump visit, but here too it was plain to see that Beijing was not intent on introducing a jarring, discordant note into the ongoing, largely cordial discussions with Washington. On the Taiwan question President Xi was quoted saying: ‘If mishandled, the two nations could collide even come into conflict.’ In other words, the US was cautioned that China’s interests need to be always borne in mind in its handling of the Taiwan issue.

The cautioning had the desired result because Trump in turn had reportedly conveyed to Taiwan that the latter’s concerns on the matter of independence had to be handled discreetly. He had told Taiwan plainly not to declare ‘independence.’

Accordingly, neither the US nor China had said or done anything that would have made either party lose face during their interaction. Apparently, both sides were sensitive to each others’ larger or national interests. And the economic interests of both powers were foremost among the latter considerations.

There is no glossing over or ignoring economic interests in the furtherance of ties between states. They are primal shaping forces of foreign policies and the fact that ‘economics drives politics’ is most apparent in US-China ties. That is, economic survival is fundamental.

Among the more memorable quotes from President Xi during the interaction, which also included US business leaders, was the following: ‘China’s doors will be open wider’ and US firms would have ‘broader prospects in the Chinese market.’

Xi went on to say that the sides had agreed to a ‘new positioning for ties’ based on ‘constructive strategic stability’. The implication here is that both sides would do well not to undermine existing, mutually beneficial economic relations in view of the wider national interests of both powers that are served by a continuation of these economic ties. That is, the way forward, in the words of the Chinese authorities, is ‘win-win cooperation.’

It is the above pronouncements by the Chinese authorities that probably led President Trump to gush that the talks were ‘very successful’ and of ‘historic and landmark’ importance. Such sentiments should only be expected of a billionaire US President, bent on economic empire-building.

One of the most important deals that were put through reportedly during the interaction was a Chinese agreement to buy some 200 Boeing jets and a ‘potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes.’ However, details were not forthcoming on other business deals that may have been hatched.

Accordingly, from the viewpoint of the protagonists the talks went off well and the chances are that the sides would stand to gain substantially from unruffled future economic ties. However, there was no mention of whether the health of the world economy or the ongoing conflicts in West Asia were taken up for discussion.

Such neglect is regretful. Although the veritable economic power houses of the world, the US and China, are likely to thrive in the short and medium terms and their ruling strata could be expected to benefit enormously from these ongoing economic interactions the same could not be said of most of the rest of the world and its populations.

Needless to say, the ongoing oil and gas crisis, for instance, resulting from the conflict situation in West Asia, is taking a heavy toll on the majority of the world’s economies and the relevant publics. While no urgent intervention to ease the lot of the latter could be expected from the Trump administration there is much that China could do on this score.

China could use its good offices with the US to address the negative fallout on the poorer sections of the world from the present global economic crunch and urge the West to help in introducing systemic changes that could facilitate these positive outcomes. After all, China remains a socialist power.

Continue Reading

Features

The Quiet Shift: China as America’s “+1” in a Changing World Order

Published

on

Xi and Trump

“Everything ever said to me by any Chinese of any station during any visit was part of an intricate design”

— Henry Kissinger

That design may already be complete before this week’s , a meeting that could shape the future balance of global power.

The wind arrives quietly. By the time it is heard, history has already begun to turn. Across Asia, that wind is no longer distant. It carries with it the exhaustion of an old order and the uncertain birth of another. The question now is not whether the world will change. It is whether those who hold power possess the wisdom to guide that change toward something less violent than the century behind us.

Since 1945, the United States has carried the burden of a global order built with its Western allies. To its credit, the world avoided another direct world war between great powers. The conflicts remained contained in distant lands—proxy wars fought in the shadows of ideology, oil, and influence. From Latin America to Asia, the American century expanded not only through prosperity, but through intervention. Yet empires, even democratic ones, grow tired. Fatigue settles slowly into institutions, alliances, and public memory. The role of global policeman no longer inspires certainty in Washington as it once did.

The “rules-based order” now confronts its own contradiction: it was built to be universal, yet it often appeared selective. During my recent visit to , a young researcher asked me quietly, “Does the West itself still believe in the rules-based order?” The question lingered long after the conversation ended. The rising century demands a more inclusive architecture—one that recognises the reality of Asian power, especially China.

My three years of field research across South and Southeast Asia, documented in , revealed a transformation too significant to dismiss as temporary. China has moved beyond being merely a competitor to the United States. In trade, infrastructure, technology, cultural diplomacy, and economic influence, Beijing has established itself as what may be called the world’s “US +1.”

Great powers often search for such a partner. History shows this tendency clearly. When an empire becomes overextended—burdened by wars, alliances, sanctions, tariffs, and crises—it seeks another center of gravity to stabilize the system it can no longer manage alone. The United States today faces disorder stretching from Venezuela to Iran, from Ukraine to the unsettled Middle East. In this landscape, China emerges not simply as a rival, but as a state powerful enough to broker peace where Washington alone no longer can.

Drawing from the lessons of the Nixon–Mao era, warned that “” The United States and China are now engaged in a long-term economic, technological, political, and strategic competition. Managing that competition wisely may become the defining challenge of this century. In such a deeply polarized and unstable world, recognising China as a “US +1” partner is not surrender, but strategic realism.

Donald Trump understood this reality before boarding his flight to meet Xi Jinping. Their meeting inside Zhongnanhai—the guarded compound where China’s leadership governs—was never merely ceremonial. It symbolized a deeper recognition already acknowledged quietly within the itself: China is the nearest peer competitor the United States has ever confronted. Before departing Washington, Trump seemed to reassess not only China’s strength, but its unavoidable position as a “” shaping the future global balance.

Yet the significance of a Trump–Xi meeting extends beyond trade wars, tariffs, or diplomatic spectacle. It presents an opportunity to confront two crises shaping the century ahead: global energy insecurity and regional instability. Washington increasingly understands the limits of direct engagement with Tehran. Decades of pressure, sanctions, and confrontation have produced exhaustion rather than resolution. In that vacuum, Beijing now possesses leverage that Washington does not.

For China, this is an opportunity to evolve from a development partner into a security actor. Xi Jinping’s (GSI) was never designed merely as rhetoric. It was intended as the next phase of Chinese influence—transforming economic dependence into strategic trust. The geopolitical spillover from the Iranian conflict now offers Beijing a historic opening to project itself as a stabilising force in the region, not against the United States, but alongside it as a “US +1” partner.

If China succeeds in helping stabilise the Gulf and secure energy corridors vital to Asia, it will reshape perceptions of Chinese power globally. Beijing would no longer be seen only as the builder of ports, railways, and industrial zones, but as a guarantor of regional balance. This transition—from infrastructure diplomacy to security diplomacy—may become one of the defining geopolitical shifts of the coming decade.

Xi Jinping does not seek open confrontation. His strategy is older, more patient, and perhaps more formidable because of its restraint. Beijing speaks not of domination, but of a “,” advanced through three instruments of influence: the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). These are not slogans alone. Across Asia, many governments increasingly trust China as a development partner more than any other power.

India, despite its ambitions, has not matched this scale of regional penetration. In both ASEAN and South Asia, China’s economic gravity is felt more deeply. Ports, railways, technology networks, and financial dependency have altered the geopolitical map quietly, without the spectacle of war.

In , I compared three inward-looking national strategies shaping Asia today: Trump’s MAGA, Modi’s emerging economic nationalism , and Xi’s strategy. Among them, China has demonstrated the greatest structural resilience. Faced with American tariffs and decoupling pressures, Beijing diversified its supply chains across Central Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Rail corridors now connect Chinese industry to European markets through Eurasia. ASEAN has surpassed the United States as China’s largest trading partner, while the European Union follows closely behind. Exports to America have declined sharply, yet China continues to expand. Trump, once defined by confrontation, now arrives seeking a new “” with China—an acknowledgment that economic rivalry alone can no longer define the relationship between the world’s two largest powers.

Unlike Washington, which increasingly retreats from multilateral institutions, Beijing presents itself as the defender of multilateralism. Whether genuine or strategic matters less than perception. In geopolitics, perception often becomes reality.

What emerges, then, is not surrender between rivals, but interdependence between powers too large to isolate one another. The future may not belong to a bipolar Cold War, but to a reluctant coexistence. The United States now recognises that China possesses diversified markets and partnerships capable of reducing dependence on America. China, in turn, understands that its long march toward global primacy still requires strategic engagement with the United States.

This is where the true geopolitical shift begins.

Many analysts continue to frame China solely as a threat. Yet history rarely moves through absolutes. The next world order may not be built through confrontation alone, but through uneasy partnership. Artificial intelligence, technological supremacy, economic stability, and global governance now demand cooperation between Washington and Beijing, whether either side admits it publicly or not.

Trump will likely celebrate his personal relationship with Xi, presenting himself as the American leader capable of negotiating a “better deal” with China than his predecessors. But beneath the rhetoric lies something larger: the gradual acceptance of China’s indispensable role in shaping the future international order.

Even the question of war increasingly returns to Beijing. If Washington seeks an understanding with Tehran, China’s influence becomes unavoidable. Iran listens to Beijing in ways it no longer listens to the West. This alone signals how profoundly the balance of power has shifted. And Xi, careful as always, refuses to openly inherit the mantle of global leadership. He delays, softens, and obscures intention. It is part of a longer strategy: to rise without provoking the final resistance of a declining hegemon too early.

History rarely announces its turning point. Empires fade slowly, while new powers rise quietly beneath the noise of the old order. Washington still holds immense power, but Beijing increasingly holds the patience, reach, and strategic depth to shape what comes after.

The century ahead may not belong to one power alone, but to the uneasy balance between Washington and Beijing. And in that silence, a new world order is already taking shape.

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

Continue Reading

Features

Egypt … here I come

Published

on

Chit-Chat Nethali Withanage

Three months ago, 19-year-old Nethali Withanage, with Brian Kerkoven as her mentor, walked the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week. On 06 June, she’ll walk for Sri Lanka in Hurghada, Egypt, as the country’s delegate to Top Model of the World 2026._

I caught up with Nethali as she prepares to fly out, this weekend, and here’s how our chit-chat went:

1. Tell me something about yourself?

I’m someone who blends creativity with ambition. I’ve always loved expressing myself, whether it’s through fashion, styling, or the way I present myself to the world. At the same time, I’m very driven and disciplined, especially when I was working, as a student counsellor, at Campus One, at a young age, where I’ve learned how to connect with people, understand them, and communicate with confidence. I believe I’m still evolving, and that’s what excites me the most … becoming better every single day.

2. What made you decide to be a model?

Modelling felt natural to me because it combines everything I love – fashion, confidence, and storytelling without words. I realised that modelling isn’t just about appearance, it’s about presence and how you carry your energy. I wanted to be part of an industry where I could express different sides of myself, while inspiring others to feel confident in their own skin.

3. What sets you apart from other models?

I would say my ability to connect. Whether it’s with the camera, a brand, or an audience, I bring authenticity. I also have a strong background in communication and sales, which gives me an edge in understanding how to represent a brand, not just wear it. I don’t want to just model clothes, I want to bring them to life.

4. What clothing do you prefer to model?

I enjoy modelling versatile styles, but I’m especially drawn to elegant and expressive fashion pieces that tells a story. I love looks that allow me to embody confidence and femininity, whether it’s a structured outfit or something soft and flowing.

5. What is the most important aspect of modelling?

Confidence combined with professionalism. Confidence allows you to own the moment, but professionalism ensures that you respect the work, the team, and the brand you represent. Both are equally important.

6. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?

I would say I’m learning to trust myself more and not overthink. I’ve realised that growth comes from embracing who you are, not constantly trying to change it. So instead of changing something, I’m focused on becoming more confident in my own voice.

7. School?

I did my O/Ls at Seventh Day Adventist High School Kandana, and, while at school, I was actively involved in creative activities. I enjoyed participating in English Day events that allowed me to express myself and interact with others. Those experiences helped me build confidence, teamwork, and communication skills, which continue to shape who I am today.

8. Happiest moment?

One of my happiest moments is realising how far I’ve come from being unsure of myself to stepping into opportunities, like modelling, and representing myself with confidence. That feeling of growth is something I truly value, and also a dream come true!

9. Your idea of perfect happiness?

Perfect happiness for me is peace of mind, being surrounded by people I love, doing what I’m passionate about, and feeling proud of who I am becoming.

10. Your ideal guy?

My ideal partner is someone who is respectful, supportive, and confident in himself. Someone who values growth, understands my ambitions, and encourages me to be the best version of myself.

11. Which living person do you most admire?

I admire strong, self-made individuals who have built their identity through hard work and resilience. People who stay true to themselves, despite challenges, inspire me, because they show that success is not just about talent, but also about strength and consistency.

12. Your most treasured possession?

My most treasured possession is my confidence. It’s something I’ve built over time, and it allows me to face challenges, take opportunities, and believe in myself, even when things are uncertain.

13. If you were marooned on a desert island, who would you like as your companion?

I would choose someone who is calm, positive, and resourceful, someone who can turn a difficult situation into an adventure. The right mindset matters more than anything.

14. Your most embarrassing moment?

I’m 19 and still haven’t faced any most embarrassing moment. But I would say I’ve had small moments where things didn’t go as planned, but I’ve learned to laugh at myself. Those moments remind me that perfection isn’t necessary; confidence is about how you recover, not how you avoid mistakes.

15. Done anything daring?

Pursuing modelling and stepping into competitions is something I consider daring. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to grow, both personally and professionally.

16. Your ideal vacation?

My ideal vacation would be somewhere peaceful, yet beautiful, like a beach destination where I can relax, reflect, and reconnect with myself, while enjoying nature.

17. What kind of music are you into?

I choose music that matches my mood at that time, whether it’s calm and relaxing or energetic and uplifting. Music is something that helps me express emotions and stay inspired.

18. Favourite radio station?

Usually I don’t listen to radio stations but whenever I get into a car I would search for Yes FM because it has a refined balance of contemporary hits and timeless music. I appreciate how it maintains a vibrant yet sophisticated energy, keeping listeners engaged while creating a consistently uplifting atmosphere. It’s something I enjoy because it adds a sense of positivity and elegance to my day.

19. Favourite TV station?

At the moment, I don’t have a television at home, but growing up, my favourite TV station was ‘Nickelodeon’. I genuinely loved the shows and series it aired; they were fun, creative, and full of personality. It was something I always looked forward to, and those memories still bring a sense of joy and nostalgia, whenever I think about it.

20. Any major plans for the future?

My future plans are to grow in the modelling industry, work with international brands, build a strong personal brand and finish completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Studies. At the same time, I want to explore my creative side further, especially in fashion and business, so I can create something of my own one day.

Continue Reading

Trending