:: Bhutan DNC -Recent Updates ::

DRUK NATIONAL CONGRESS URGES FOR PRIORITISATION OF DEMOCRATIC REFORMS
AND THE IMPEMENTATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS,
DEMANDS THE INSTITUTING OF AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY.

Over a year and a half has gone by since Bhutan became “democratic”, but there is little to evidence Bhutan’s democratic credentials, and a lot is still left wanting.

The Government’s prioritization of democratic reforms is at most embarrassingly inadequate. It is carrying on with business as usual, with, apart from the holding of elections and a new elected Parliament, nothing to really differentiate its functioning from the governments of the past. If the essential ingredients and basis of democracy is not put into place, democratic governance will always remain a far off mirage. And this will be to no one’s advantage, and will in the end bring instability.

ADDRESS OF RONGTHONG KUNLEY DORJI
on the occasion of the 15th FOUNDATION DAY
of the DRUK NATIONAL CONGRESS.
Dated : 16th June 2009.

Today, on the 15th foundation day of the Druk National Congress, I congratulate and thank the Bhutanese people - the Bhutanese public spread across the villages and towns of Bhutan, Bhutanese exilees working from across the globe, all DNC party members, individuals in the Royal Government, the Army and the Police, and His Majesty Jigme Singye Wangchuk, our 4th Monarch, for his farsightedness and understanding – each and every member of Bhutanese society. On this occasion, I also thank all our friends who have accompanied us and lent their support on our journey towards democracy. I would like to particularly thank the people of India and Nepal and their representatives in their Governments through the years, and organisations, governments and individuals world-wide, who have all been a part of our momentous journey.

When the Druk National Congress was established in June of 1994, we vowed to bring about a positive change in Bhutan – to establish Parliamentary Democracy, to secure and guarantee for all our citizens, fundamental rights, including the right to equality, freedom and justice, irrespective of their race, tribe, caste, religion, sex, or ideological conviction, and to declare Bhutan a multiethnic, multilingual, indivisible, independent and democratic, Buddhist Monarchical Kingdom.

The DNC stood firm in its conviction that democratic governance is the only solution to all the problems that Bhutan faces, and is also the only means to ensure that the process of improving the well-being of Bhutan and the Bhutanese people, continues into the future, and that it is this well-being that will ensure not only the stability of Bhutan but also the institution of Monarchy.

15 years ago, while democracy for the Bhutanese seemed a faraway, almost illusionary light at the end of the tunnel, it is finally in our grasp. All our collective efforts have now precipitated a foundation for a promising future for all Bhutanese.

But our work is far from over. While we have succeeded in achieving a legal democracy we must now work to instil a democratic tradition, without which all this effort and achievement will just remain in piece of paper and in a set of bland procedures.

Democracy is not a machine that runs by itself once the proper principles and procedures are inserted. A healthy democracy depends a lot on the development of a democratic culture, which is shaped by its citizens who pursue their interests, exercise their rights and take responsibility for their own lives, and for the society at large.

An essential component of good governance and the adoption of beneficial policies, is peoples’ participation, wherefrom emanates policy decisions that are an outcome of continuous contribution of unfiltered information coming in from the widest possible spectrum of individual citizens, analysis thereof, and responses drawn therefrom. (It is for this reason that, while the Druk National Congress has been, and is still critical of many policies of the Royal Government of Bhutan, it has been with the sole motive to bridge information inflow gaps, draw policy improvements, and facilitate improvement in the lives of the Bhutanese people). People need to take their own decisions, particularly at the local level, and strong local governments are essential for a healthy democracy. If such an infrastructure and channel does not exist, the fallouts are, inadequacies in planning, formulating and implementing policies and responses. And such inadequacies invariably evolve into the creation of a system that ends up serving the interests of a select few, at the merciless expense of the common citizen. While at the very top of the ladder, there is often abject ignorance of ground level realities and a delusionary sense of security. While this is invariably true for authoritarian systems of governance, it is also very true for democracies without a democratic tradition.

This is why it is so important to develop a democratic culture. A democratic society needs the commitment of its citizens who accept the inevitability of disagreement, as well as the necessity for tolerance. It is important to recognise that many disagreements in a democratic society are not between “rights” and “wrongs”, but between different interpretations of democratic rights and social priorities. And individuals, groups and governments must be willing, at a minimum, to tolerate each other’s differences, recognising that the other side may have valid rights and a legitimate point of view, and come together to address issues in the spirit of democracy.

Our legal system and our laws must also be quickly adapted and amended as necessary, to our newly acquired democracy and people’s sovereignty. In a democracy, no one is above the law, which is, after all, the creation of the people. The state must have the power to maintain order and punish criminal acts, but the rules and procedures by which a state enforces its laws, must be public and explicit, not secret, arbitrary, or subject to political manipulation by the State. Whether rich or poor, ethnic majority or religious minority, political ally of the state or opponent, all must be entitled to equal protection before the law.

With regard to the Constitution, while we will continue to seek necessary amendments through the Parliamentary process, we lay strong emphasis on the need to bring about immediate crucial amendments to Article 2, 7 and 15.

Amendments to Article 2 should be by a 2/3rds majority vote of the Parliament and not by a national referendum, so as not to precipitate a constitutional crisis (such as that which transpired in Nepal in the aftermath of the Royal massacre incident). Further, the Parliament is the highest body that is representative of the people’s opinion and has rightful authority to legislate on behalf of the people. While the current provision is an improvement from the previous draft Constitution, in which it was an unamendable provision, it is still inadequate to effectively protect the Monarch. Vesting the Parliament with powers it can immediately exercise if an untoward situation arises will be the only effective deterrent.

The exercise of Article 2, Sections 16(a), (c), (d) and (e) should be by recommendation by appropriate Parliamentary Committee/s or alternatively by recommendation by any other authorised committee/s formed for the purpose. Article 2, Section 16(b) should be deleted as it undermines and overrules all provisions and procedures of the Constitution and Bhutan’s laws.

Article 15 needs amendment to allow for a multiparty Parliamentary system of government. The current provision does not allow for regional parties mandated to work in their own geographic or social areas to participate in governance, and in Bhutan, which not divided into smaller federally administered units, a 2-party parliamentary system does not efficiently address regional issues nor allows for a voice in the central government (parties normally take a collective stand on issues). Strong regions make up a strong nation and regions must be adequately empowered to be represented in the Parliament without having to tag up with a larger parties with possibly other priorities. Further a 2-tiered electoral process is drains twice the resources of a multiparty electoral process, with no real benefit in Bhutan’s case.

The Druk National Congress did not apply for registration in the 2008 elections for two reasons. One, the Party did not approve of the electoral process and did not want to be officially associated or endorse the process as being truly democratic. Two, given the current reality and the stand of the Royal Government, with undoubted chances of its registration application being refused on some ground or the other, it saw no relevance in taking the issue forward. Rather the Party chose to be actively involved in bringing the candidatures of the current national and regional leadership to the fore and in affecting the electoral outcome. Its success can be evidenced from the electoral results where the people effectively rejected the party that was deemed by the electorate to be closer to the Monarchy and the “old” system, than the other. But the DNC will be working to create the grounds for it to participate in the next general elections.

Democracy has finally come to Bhutan, but political prisoners continue to languish in jail. We demand the immediate release of all Bhutanese prisoners who are facing or have been convicted of political offences, offences of political nature and charges that were initiated which a view to punish for them for political offences. The onus falls on the present Government to immediately undo these wrongs of the past.

Lastly, a peaceful, stable and prosperous nation is an asset, benefiting not just its neighbours, but the world. But we must understand that peace cannot be forced - it is a by-product of fulfilment, satisfaction, contentment. It is thus imperative that, while much has been achieved, all our partners must continue to, and more need to join in to participate in working together, to continuously usher in social, political and economical improvements in Bhutan and in our mutual and collective surroundings.

To,
His Majesty Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck,
The Druk Gyalpo.
Tashichhodzong, Thimphu,
Bhutan.

With great respect and humility, I submit Druk National Congress’s appreciation for the adoption of the Constitution and also congratulate Your Majesty on becoming the first Constitutional Monarch of Bhutan.

While our Kingdom is embarking on a new vibrant journey, there are matters that still need attention to ensure an equitable democracy for our people.

The denial of religion and cultural freedom had led to a religio-politico imbroglio in our beloved country. It seems a partial solution has been achieved by guaranteeing the freedom of religion and cultural rights under the Constitution.

However, the genuine intent and resolve of a new democratic Bhutan should be the released of all political prisoners at once. It is also our fervent prayer that unless the political differences and political crisis in our country is redress, including with exiled political leaders, then long-term peace, stability, economic prosperity, and happiness of all Bhutanese would not be achieved.

We are all firmly committed to strengthen the sovereignty and security of our beloved nation, therefore, we pledge full support to Your Majesty and also commit ourselves to work together to resolve all outstanding problems.

We are confident that Your Majesty will take the initiative by coming forward to a dialogue towards reconciliation and resolutions.

Four months has lapsed since the formation of a "democratic government” in Bhutan. Yet there is complete silence on various pending issues, in particular the release of political prisoners and the Bhutanese refugee impasse.

We had placed great hope and expectation on the new administration under your leadership. Besides, we assumed that you would personally take special duty in resolving all outstanding political issues that has been plaguing our country.

Your Excellency, we want to remind you that it would be a fatal assumption on your part to conclude that the sort of "democracy" instituted within Bhutan has or will automatically solve all outstanding political issues by itself. Unless the all democrat political leaders and representative, including those in exile are not integrated in the Bhutanese polity, then the peace, stable and secure Bhutan in its stride towards new era would remain a mere myth.

The responsibility to resolve these matters lies with Your Excellency's office. It is our fervent wish that this become a priority in your current course of action for Bhutan.

We await your positive action for the well-being and happiness of Bhutanese citizens.

Censure of discussions on the Draft Constitution in the first session of Parliament by the Chief Justice

To debate or not to debate the Draft Constitution in the first ever joint session of the Bhutanese Parliament was what vexed the minds of the new Parliamentarians prior to the start of the session, because the Chief Justice, Sonam Tobgay, declared that the Constitution was drafted by a 39-member committee, comprising two venerable Lopons, the National Assembly Speaker, 20 “elected” members, and representatives of the Royal Advisory Council, the Judiciary and the Government. He further stated that the Draft Constitution was already taken to the people of the twenty districts by both the 4th and the 5th Kings and no question arose of any alteration, and that it should thus be adopted as it is. The fact is that there was never any discussion on Draft Constitution. Everyone is aware that the tour of the 4th and the 5th Kings throughout Bhutan was rather opinion stating exercise than a discussion. They merely informed the people about the Draft Constitution and the public simply listened. Period.

The Draft Constitution was a “Draft” because it was not finalized and not approved by a legitimate body. The Parliamentarians have a responsibility to thoroughly and seriously discuss and examine each of its provisions to determine their appropriateness, even if it takes time. The present joint session of Parliament must address its shortcomings. Some of the shortcomings were highlighted in our open letter addressed to the new members of Parliament and submitted on the 30th of April, 2008. If these shortcomings are not addressed at this present opportune time, consequential problems are bound to affect the people, the Government, the State, and the Monarchy in future. Constitution is sacred and most important document. Because of this massive significance, a discussion on Draft Constitution with Bhutanese experts, Intellectuals and villager is must to receive and accommodate their feedbacks.

Chief Justice states that the religious personalities are above politics. If so, then why is the King, a political entity, empowered to control the religious personalities and their establishments? This is a blatant act by the King to deprive monks and Gomchens of their fundamental voting rights, thus reducing them to second-class citizens. Bhutan is their country too, and everyone in a democratic, free society is entitled to determine who should represent their interests in running their country for them and how.

The Chief Justice tries to draw a parallel between Buddha’s renunciation and the 4th King’s “abdication”. While Buddha renounced his throne, the King is on the course to controlling the religious personalities and their establishments, while at the same time holding on to a “Constitutional” Monarchy with enormous prerogatives powers. Such a comparison is totally incompatible and loaded with vested interests.

In addition, many assume that ‘democracy’ is the gift granted by the 4th King to the Bhutanese people. If it is so, then why is the regime finding it so difficult to establish a genuine form of democracy? Why does an extra-constitutional power continue to be vested with the King? Is this democracy really for the people, or is it a stage-show to consolidate more power under the peoples’ stolen seal.

The Draft Constitution states that the King is protector of all religions in Bhutan. The 4th King was in the forefront of prosecution of the Nyingmapas in the late 1990s. He forcefully converted many Nyingmapa

monasteries to Drukpa Kagyupa, a sect, he and his family seemingly patronizes, but has also enslaved. In addition, many Nyingmapa Shedras and Gomdeys were sealed. Given this track record, the people of Bhutan have no faith whatsoever that the King will uphold his Constitutional duty. All religious establishments must have the freedom and right to chart their own future and well-being, as long as their activities does not go against democratic laws. Each establishment knows best how they can protect themselves. They just need to be empowered.

Need for an increase in the number of seats in the Parliament and in the ministerial berths

The Druk National Congress has always demanded for an increase in the number of seats in the National Assembly from the current 47 to 100, and continues to do so. This will assure equitable representation and equitable development throughout the country. Given the sectors that need attention, the Druk National Congress also demands for an increase in ministerial berths from the current 10 to 20. One representative from each district must be inducted as a Minister. Some may say that such action will prove expensive. But, for the larger benefit of the people, the little bit of extra cost is nothing when compared to the large sum that would incur for the upkeep of a single family.

The question with regard to protocol primacy between Members of Parliament and the Nyi-Kyelma presents the mess that King has created by granting the “orange scarf” to ministers and speakers and blue scarf to their peers (MP) even though they are equal in House (Parliament). No one is elected to Parliament as a minister or a speaker, but as representatives of the people. It only after the elections that the winning party that decides to form the government, also picks the ministers and the speaker. During the era of absolute monarchy, a social class was deliberately created by the King amongst the bureaucracy. Those who otherwise do the same amount of work, share the same responsibilities, have to endure the humiliation of wearing a ‘white’ scarf while his peer wears the red scarf gifted by King along with 'patangs' and the title of ‘Dasho’. Such persons held the primacy in protocol over a white scarf wearer in every government or social function.

Given the situation where the ministry needs to be reshuffled due to change in responsibilities or a change in the government due to a loss of a majority in the Parliament, what happens to the scarves? The creation of ‘class’ on the basis of the colour of the scarf is remnant of the era of absolute monarchy. The democracy era has begun and therefore, such discriminatory practices must come to end. All members of Parliament, irrespective of being a minister or speaker should wear the same blue scarf. Parliamentarian, as elected representatives of the people naturally should hold primacy in protocol over the bureaucracy.

Monarchy above the law, foreboding danger to the Monarchy and of a Constitutional crisis in future

The Draft Constitution has misguidedly granted enormous powers to the Monarchy. Under such a Constitution, a vibrant and functioning parliamentary democracy will be impossible to achieve. Residuary legislative powers is vested in the Monarch (Article 2(16)(e)). Article 20(7) provides undue powers to the Monarch to sack a Prime Minister or his Cabinet. The Monarch’s legislative powers are extensive, including independent powers to send messages (Article 10(8)), convene extraordinary sessions (Article 10(12)), to nominate eminent persons constituting 20% of the Upper House (Article 11(1)(b)), to block Bills even if passed by both Legislatures (Article 13(10)&(11)).

Moreover, Article 2 prohibits the Parliament from amending the Monarch’s Constitutional powers, and essentially means that a Monarch’s powers are beyond the purview of the Parliament and the people.

Thus, vesting ultimate powers with accountability to the Parliament will be a deterrent to any possible future errant member of the Royal Family from even contemplating such ideas, for fear of appropriate action by the Parliament and the Law. Consider this very carefully for the future well-being and safety of the Monarch and the Monarchy. It is the people who decide on the system of governance of their choice, whether it be a Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, and having opted for a Constitutional Monarchy, it is the same people who will ultimately protect the system and the Monarchy.

It has fallen upon the shoulders of the new Parliamentarians to adopt a new Constitution for Bhutan. Fate has presented them with the opportunity to remedy any remaining undemocratic and anti-people provisions in the Draft Constitution. Because of this important task, which has significant ramifications for the future of Bhutan and its people, utmost consideration had to be given while deciding on the constitutional provisions while adopting the Constitution.

We demand that the Chief Justice changes his dictatorial attitude. Members of the Parliament do not give much credence to his statements but are nervous of the person behind him.

We also urge the Parliamentarians to shun their fear, doubt and uphold the supreme responsibility that the people have reposed on them. This window of opportunity mustn’t be lost. These demands are not just that of the Druk National Congress, they are the demands of the Bhutanese citizens who actively participated in bringing about a change in the power centre and in determining the makeup of the new Parliament. They sincerely want genuine democracy to take root in Bhutan. The Parliamentarians must not betray their trust. If they do so, it will be to they own political peril. They must work to accommodate the rights, aspirations and dreams of the Bhutanese people. The Parliamentarians must act in manner that the future generations can look back with pride and not with scorn.

DNC hopes Indian Prime Minister to advice Monarch on Inclusive Democracy

Druk National Congress welcomes the visit of Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Man Mohan Singh to Bhutan on 16th May. Dr. Singh is accorded the honour of being the first foreign Prime Minister to address the joint session of newly constituted Parliament of Bhutan. DNC sincerely hopes that Indian Prime Minister will use this opportunity to point the inherent flaws in exclusive and elitist democracy to the Bhutanese Kings and counterpart. This will serve as a reminder to the King to resolve the outstanding political crisis, in which our country has been gripped for last two decades.

DNC trusts that Indian Prime Minister will support and guarantee Bhutan’s sovereignty and integrity and would assist her in International and regional forum as well.

First of all, please accept my sincere congratulations on your electoral success.

The relentless campaign by pro-democracy forces, demanding the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan, has finally yielded results. But non-the-less, the steps taken are still exclusive and essentially anti-people in nature.

Your electorate has bestowed upon you their trust, and the responsibility of acting on their behalf in protecting their interests and working for their betterment. Democratic elections is not a race to decide the victors and the vanquished, it is a competition to serve the people.

It has also fallen upon your shoulders to adopt a new Constitution for Bhutan next month. Fate has presented you with the opportunity to remedy any remaining undemocratic and anti-people provisions in the draft Constitution. Because of this important task on your hands, which has significant ramifications for the future of our country, I want your undivided attention, and urge you to give utmost consideration while deciding on the constitutional provisions while adopting the Constitution.

1. As is the norm in all democratic countries, the Constitution must provide for the instituting of a National Human Rights Commission to regularly monitor the human rights situation, and to scrutinize and document human rights abuses, and to also provide redressal to victims of human rights abuses, irrespective of whether the State or any non-State machinery is responsible.

2. For proper representation and to allow for the freedom of political choice, the strength of Parliament must be increased from existing 47 to 75. More constituencies, in proportion to population, must be delimited, so that representation is proportional and adequate, and so that the needs of the electorate can be effectively addressed. In this context, it will be also pertinent to reserve three seats for representatives from the Central Monastic Body/Drukpa Kargyu bodies, two seats for representatives from Nyingmapa associations and one seat for a representative from Hindu associations. This is important, because each respective culture, and its heritage, including the interests and rights of their members, must be accorded equal opportunity in raising their concerns in the highest peoples’ decision making body, so that their interests are also safeguarded and preserved.

3. Voting rights of monks and gomchens must be restored. They too are citizens of Bhutan and have a right to decide on the fate and administration of the country. Depriving them of their voting rights has categorically rendered them third–class citizens in their own country. In a democracy, even criminals have a right to vote, so excluding any Bhutanese of suitable age from exercising his or her right to vote, is unfair, biased and undemocratic.

4. The stipulation of eligibility to stand for election is outrageous and anti-people. Vide the Election Act Section 173 (d) and 174 (d), i.e. a candidate must “possess a formal university degree” to be eligible, means that only the elite and exclusive are eligible to participate in the democratic process. In a nation where we have given the highest respect and accordance to our national language and culture, and have also take pride in this being the supreme sign of our identity, we contradictorily undermine and insult these very values that we have accepted, by excluding graduates from traditional educational institutions, who essentially go through the same qualificationary processes as other western-type institutions. This is nothing less then equivalent to burning our national dress in favour of the western suit. Even normally, in widely-accepted democratic norms around the world, every citizen of the electorate’s choice, has an inalienable right to vie through elections for an elected post, irrespective of race, sex, language, religion or educational qualifications or background. The will of the people should be the only stipulation. It is the electorate who is vested with the power to accept or reject his candidature. Articles such as Article 23(4)(b)], “terminated from Public service”, Article 23(4)(c)], “is convicted for any criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment”, Article 23(4)(d)], “is in arrears of taxes to the Government…” are those which are of concern. Because it is every citizen’s inalienable and inviolable right to nominate competent candidates to stand for elected posts, amongst those whom they feel can work in their interests, the right to nominate candidates to stand for elected positions must be recognized. These preposterous stipulations must be removed and right of every individual citizen must be restored.

5. Bhutanese citizens who were engaged in the democratic struggle are termed as ‘Ngolops’ and have been barred from participating in the democratic process. Even their kith and kin have been denied the right to participate in the democratic process. Their only “crime” being their steadfast campaign demanding for democratic and human rights – the fruits of which will now be reaped by the Bhutanese population. Their sacrifices in getting Bhutan to this point gives them the right to be allowed to participate in the democratic process.

6. The role of the Opposition is over-circumscribed (Article 18), and leaves political parties vulnerable to questionable dissolution (Article 15(11)). Article 10(22), which entails that the concurrence of not less than two-thirds of the total numbers of members of each House respectively, can remove the right of immunity of a member, affords enormous powers to a ruling party to oppress or persecute a weak opposition. Such a scenario is best demonstrated in the make up of the present National Assembly, in which the Ruling Party has 45 seats out of the total of 47, with the Opposition Party holding on to only two seats. Such provisions must be removed.

7. A multiparty system is a common characteristic of a democratic setup, and provides the required variety of choices and competency to the general public in regard to policies and issues, and therefore must also be instituted in Bhutan. The recently concluded elections under a two-party system does not qualify as truly democratic, because the fundamental criteria of democracy has not been met. Observe the two-party electoral process in the US and the run-up procedures to the final elections - a lot of effort and money goes in to selecting the people’s choices of the final nominees. In Bhutan’s case, a two-party arrangement, unless executed in completeness, has and will end up being just a perceived “democracy”, and will actually be unable to offer a truly democratic choice to the people. A multi-party democracy is what can address the needs of the Bhutanese people.

8. The draft Constitution has misguidedly granted enormous powers to the Monarchy. Under such a Constitution, a vibrant and functioning parliamentary democracy will be impossible to achieve. Residuary legislative powers is vested in the Monarch (Article 2(16)(e)). Article 20(7) provides undue powers to the Monarch to sack a Prime Minister or his Cabinet. The Monarch’s legislative powers are extensive, including independent powers to send messages (Article 10(8)), convene extraordinary sessions (Article 10(12)), to nominate eminent persons constituting 20% of the Upper House (Article 11(1)(b)), to block Bills even if passed by both Legislatures (Article 13(10)&(11)).

It is a gross misconception that keeping the Monarchy above the Constitution and the Law protects the Monarchy. On the contrary, such provisions actually prevent the Parliament and the people from protecting the Monarch, when necessary. God forbid, if an untoward incident were to occur, where a member of the Royal Family thus “protected” under the Constitution, commits a murderous act against another such Royal Family member or even the Monarch, the Parliament or the Judiciary would be powerless to take any action on its own. There is no guarantee that in future all “protected” Royal Family members will be appropriately well-behaved, and could possibly turn out to be a potential threat to a ruling Monarch or his heir(consider the Royal massacre in Nepal, where the Government had no choice but to declare Crown Prince Dipendra the King even after having murdered his father, the King. The Monarch and his family were above the law and when the onslaught came from within, there was nothing the Parliament or the people could do. Even if the massacre had been perpetrated by another ‘protected’ Royalty, there would have been little the Parliament or the people could have done). Thus, vesting ultimate powers with accountability to the Parliament will be a deterrent to any future errant member of the Royal Family from even contemplating such ideas, for fear of appropriate action by the Parliament and the Law. Consider this very carefully for the future well-being and safety of the Monarch and the Monarchy. It is the people who decide on the system of governance of their choice, whether it be a Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, and having opted for a Constitutional Monarchy, it is the same people who will ultimately protect the system and the Monarchy.

Your conscience is but your own. Follow your conscience while adopting the Constitution. The hopes of the Nation, the Bhutanese people, and the excluded sections of society rests on you.

A team of 15 observers from 13 different European Union countries arrived in the Bhutan to observe the first ever general election that is scheduled on the 24th of March, 2008. The Druk National Congress welcomes this. But taking into account the recent remarks of the team, it puts into doubt the effectiveness of the team in observing the happenings in the backstage that will determine the ultimate outcome of the elections. It is obvious that the process is being observed only at face value. Further, we apprehend that EU observers will bless Bhutan’s general election in spite of all shortcomings. Mr. Javier Pomes, the Chief of the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM), said, “In our observations so far, most of the processes comply with international standards.”.

In fact, he and his team members understand and acknowledge the fact that only two political parties both headed by the relatives of the King are allowed to function and participate in the political process. Despite the elections being only two weeks away, fundamental human and democratic rights for the people still does not exist. People are still arrested for engaging in political activities that does not favour the present regime and its cronies. Large sections of the population are excluded from the process including the people in exile. Are these practices in compliance with International standards?

We are aware of the existing democratic practices and traditions prevalent in European Countries. We are therefore, disheartened to hear such irresponsible remarks. Bhutanese democrats are no different from democrats in European democratic countries; we too accept a Constitutional Monarchy that is akin to the Constitutional Monarchies in European countries. Henceforth, we hope that the Team will advise the Bhutan regime to work towards a genuine and inclusive democracy.

Druk National Congress stands with 10,000 refugees in this hour of personal grief

Druk National Congress is deeply anguished and saddened at this moment of greatest tragedy heaped on the unfortunate families by an outbreak of fire at Goldhap Refugee Camp (Jhapa, Nepal), leaving more than 10,000 refugee homeless. The Bhutanese refugees, already living nightmare of a life as refugee, since last seventeen years – whole family holed up in a one-room thatched roof house, without access to basic amenities like electricity etc. Their daily food, as well as nutritional intake, has drastically shrunk. Quality of their life has gradually deteriorated over the years. Whatever little household belongings these 10,000 people have managed to acquire, have now been gutted in this fire. It is indeed a very welcome gesture of UNHCR and Nepal government to extend their help promptly and the Druk National Congress expresses its sincere gratitude to both. In addition Druk National Congress appeals to international community to extend their help to the affected poor refugees. The donor agencies, relief agencies, non-government and humanitarian organizations, working in South Asia can play a critical role in alleviating the plight of hapless refugees.

Druk National Congress firmly believes that Royal Government of Bhutan should come forward to help the victims of fire, as the cause is humanitarian and politics must be relegated to periphery. Further, throughout the world Bhutan is recognized as a Buddhist Kingdom and practitioner of compassion and kindness. This unfortunate incident provides an opportunity to the Royal Government of Bhutan to demonstrate that indeed the country practices the teachings of Buddhism, in words and spirit. And above all, these victims are primarily bona fide Bhutanese citizens and by virtue of this, they have a right to receive help from their nation. Therefore, this is high time that Royal Government of Bhutan come out of its slumber.

Of late, the third-country resettlement has featured prominently in local and international news. We firmly believe that it is the personal choice of each refugee to decide his/her own fate. But at the same time, majority of refugees sheltering in camps, want to return Bhutan with dignity and honour. The present crisis has precipitated owing to non-Bhutanese issues and we cannot afford another crisis because of it.

Therefore, in this backdrop, the verification of Bhutanese and non-Bhutanese has become very important. The Joint verification process, jointly initiated by a team of Bhutan and Nepal Government in early 2002, was suspended over some trivial differences. Since both the nations are witnessing historic developments, Druk National Congress, urges both governments to resume the stalled verification process in order to evolve a just, fair and honourable permanent resolution of Bhutanese refugees crisis.

The Kuensel, the official newspaper of Bhutan, reported that four bomb blasts rocked Bhutan between 11.10 am and 2.10 pm in four different Dzongkhags(districts) on January 20, including one in the capital, Thimphu. A day later the United Revolutionary Front of Bhutan owned responsibility for the blasts.

The Druk National Congress(DNC) categorically denounces this act and also condemns the use of any violence to achieve democracy. It believes that a violent approach undermines the very foundation of democracy that is based on majority rule and minority rights. Democracy achieved by such means is never stable as it justifies the use of force to achieve ends whenever disputable issues arise.

The DNC has repeatedly appealed to the Bhutanese Regime to resolve the protracted refugee problem and also warned about subsequent residual consequences of its delay. It has also urged the Regime to make the democratization process inclusive so that all Bhutanese can participate in this effort. The Regime has refused to see reason and is using the democracy exercise to consolidate its hold on the governance process even more. Given the Regime’s adamant stand on these issues, precipitation of such incidents was inevitable.

However, having had to unwillingly announce democratic reforms in Bhutan(evidenced by the half-hearted, cosmetic and manipulative approach to the process that is purported to unfold democracy in Bhutan), such ‘incidents’ could easily become a pretext for the Regime to stall the democratization process. At the same time, by declaring that it will be going ahead with its ‘democratization process’ despite the blasts, this incident also provides the Regime an opportunity to send an image-building ‘message’ to the international community that it is serious and sincere about ‘democratizing’ Bhutan.
Either way, it is the Regime that stands to ‘apparently’ gain, and little does it benefit the establishment of democracy or ensuring justice in Bhutan.

The initiation of the democratization of Bhutan is the outcome of years of effort and struggle. The DNC is of the opinion that in the present context, the process, though deeply flawed, needs to begin without delay. Fine-tuning democratic governance is a process that can improve with time. Both electors and the elected alike discover the ropes as time goes by, learning and being compelled into shouldering their respective responsibilities with dedication and sincerity. And ultimately working to resolve all issues that concerns Bhutan and its people.

The DNC will not let up in its efforts to continue urging the Royal Government of Bhutan to rectify the shortcomings in its present democracy exercise, and will persist towards resolving all issues concerning Bhutan and its people within the quickest possible timeframe, but it also demands that the RGOB continues the process of democratization as per schedule and as previously declared by it.

The King of Bhutan has introduced a unique type of democratic process in Bhutan. The international community has already congratulated Bhutan (King) on “historic election" with the pre-conceived notion that genuine democracy has finally been introduced. Sadly, the basic tenets of democracy are totally absent in Bhutan. People are goaded to press the electronic voting Machine (EVM) and this process is no different to the voting system initiated by the Third King in 1953. Prior to voting, background details of each candidate are required to be submitted to the King. If there is slightest chance of any candidate, having potentials to challenge the authority of the monarch in future, his/her candidature is disqualified. A wooden box ballot contains the names of two contenders and people are required to vote ‘Yes’ and ‘No’. This practice was prevalent until 2006.

The first so-called 'historic election 2007' was conducted under a socio-political environment, where no fundamental human rights and democratic rights are recognized. It will be sacrilege to mention that the polling is conducted under 'free and fair' atmosphere. Consider these facts - the freedom of speech and expression is restricted; the freedom of press is banned; the assembly and association of people are banned; and so on and so forth. King introduced a ridiculous and outrageous stipulation, as prerequisite eligibility, i.e., candidates aiming to contest election for becoming a Member of Parliament (MP), must have a university degree of western education format. Large section of population, endowed with experience and patriotism, are thus denied their inalienable democratic right to participate in politics and to become MP. The power of Monarchy remains intact till date, as the National Constitution does not have any control over Monarchy. Can this practice be really called democratic?

In universally accepted democratic practice, a multi-party system must exist. However, in Bhutan, only two political parties have been allowed to operate, both having close proximity with palace. One of these parties is People's Democratic Party (PDP), headed by Mr. Sangay Nidup, maternal uncle of King, and the second is Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT) headed by Mr. Jigme Thinley, matrimonial relative of King. The third party, Bhutan People's United Party (BPUP) formed by Mr. Sigay Dorji, was disqualified/unregistered by Election Commission on November 27, 2007, on the ground that this party doesn't have will, competence, experience, qualification and appropriate support to contest elections. In addition, all political parties in exile are banned. Obviously, King will be amenable, if either of his 'confidantes' Jigme Thinley or Sangay Nidup becomes Prime Minister. Though, I have a feeling that King will prefer Singay Nidup for the Prime Minister’s Job.

The candidates, successfully elected, in this recent election for National Council, offer a prelude to the scenario that will be unfolding in the forthcoming National Assembly election. Majority of them come from a bureaucratic background. Even two 26 years old young person are “elected." It is a matter of grave shame that inexperienced young persons are allowed to occupy seats in National Council. They would be overwhelmed, overpowered and dominated by the five nominees of King. King's most obedient, trusted, loyal and experienced personals, are still working under him. These people would be drafted in the Upper House. These nominees would undermine the true democratic ethos in the National Council. Being 'yes man' to King, I have an apprehension that they will place the interest of Monarchy on a higher pedestal, compared to the interest of public at large. I foresee no change in legislations; they will continue to preserve the structures and systems that prevailed in absolute monarchy and protected Monarchial interests. Even the losing candidates would be eventually drafted back to bureaucratic setup. The only discernible change in election is - the wooden ballot has graduated to Electronic Voting Machine. Can this practice be called dawn of democracy in Bhutan?

There were sporadic revolts against Fourth King since 1974 and most rebels were arrested in their early stages. However, 1990s witnessed the first full-fledged revolt against King by Lhotshampas and certain section of Sharchopa. It demonstrated that 70 percent of the population resented and disapproved King's policies. The aftermath of rebellion resulted in human rights abuses and atrocities, on a large scale. Relatives of rebels are barred to participate in current democratic election; in fact, they are always under the government surveillance. The political prisoners of 1997 eastern Bhutan uprising continue to be incarcerated and there is no ray of hope for their release so far. The democratic voting rights of monks, Gomchen, Anim are denied. Are they not Bhutanese citizen? Is this a democracy?

The familiarization tour by PDP and DPT throughout country has garnered enough action. The people, villages, districts and perhaps regions too, are sharply polarized on party lines. Discords, friction within family are created. Both political parties are engaged in wooing voters by offering bribes in the forms of cash and kind. Election Commission has failed to live up to its promise to root-out the corruption in electoral practice. In fact, King, Election Commission and political parties made a mockery of Constitution.

For last hundred years, the people of Bhutan have been ruled by King like animals. Therefore, I once again ask - Are Bhutanese willing to live yet another animal life by meekly submitting to King's anti-people and anti-democratic polices? When King agreed to become a Constitutional Monarch, it was expected that he would be remorseful for his past misdeeds and would therefore usher the true democratic reforms. But now, it appear, he is incorrigible, remorseless and cold-hearted. These democratic reforms are only aimed to ensure that Bhutan remains in the iron-grip of Royal family and Royal family continues to accrue all the benefits, as if Bhutan is personal estate of King. We, the people of Bhutan, should know that all of us are equal to King. Destiny of monarchial institution rests in the peoples’ will. Democracy in Bhutan, at present, exists only on paper. The true democracy must be enjoyed by the entire population, rather than few privileged ones.

The Druk National Congress reiterates its resolute stand that we will wedge a relentless non-violent struggle against the present form of 'democracy', till it is transformed into an inclusive genuine democracy. The Druk National Congress has re-drafted the Constitution encompassing all democratic aspirations. Though our expectation from King is minimal, yet the Druk National Congress continues to harbor a feeble hope that there is still some time for King to re-correct the current undemocratic process. If King wants to ensure the longevity of his monarchial institution, onus lies in his present course of action. Kings must know the universal truth - in order to enjoy benefits, other people must also be supplemented with same benefits. Druk National Congress warns, if Bhutan falls in the grip of disturbances, unrest, instability and anarchy in near future, only King will be responsible.

The Election Commission of Bhutan received a Royal Decree from the Fifth King on 30th June, 2007 to conduct Parliamentary elections “as per the provisions of the Draft Constitution”. This decree officially admits that the people would enjoy constitutional rights enshrined in draft Constitution, including fundamental rights.

However, the political process unfolding inside country is to the contrary. So far the Election Commission, the Judiciary apparatus and the administrative machinery has entertained only two royalist parties, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT). Mr. Sangay Nidup, President of PDP and maternal uncle of the King and Mr. Jigme Thinley, President of DPT and relative of the Queens are given unlimited access to conduct themselves in whatever they wish to fulfill their objectives. But, genuine democrats are either excluded from the process or intimidated and threatened with imprisonment when they voice their opinions. Under such circumstances, can the International Community accept the Royal Government of Bhutan's democratization process and the Parliamentary elections as a free and fair? In such an environment, we believe that the Parliamentary elections going to take place in 2008 is total a total farce.

The Druk National Congress questions the role of the Judiciary and the Government machinery. The common people are denied fundamental, civil and political rights as enshrined in draft Constitution. As we dispatch this press release, seventeen people, whose only "crime" was to voice their political opinion, are still imprisoned in Samdrup Jongkhar and Mongar. They were arrested for assembling and freely expressing their opinion on the present politics. Most of them are relatives of democrats who participated in the 1997 demonstrations in Eastern Bhutan against the Royal Government. Some of them are those who had been released after serving prison sentences for the 1997 uprising. Why is the Judiciary not protecting their fundamental rights?

Both the Chief Justice of Bhutan and the caretaker Prime Minister are turning a blind eye to the present political situation. The aiding of the royalist parties by the Judiciary and the Administration has aroused fears that both establishments would brush aside the pleas of the general public even beyond 2008. In order to allay these fears, the Government must immediately release these detained persons and recognize their right to freedom of expression. Moreover, the Government must come up with policies that ensure political inclusiveness. Every citizen of suitable age has an inalienable right to contest for any public office, irrespective of race, caste, sex, language, religion or any other status. People from all sections or strata of society must be made eligible to participate in politics, without bias and without stipulations that disqualify candidates unjustifiably. Lack of mass representation and continuation of the present exclusive polices is bound to create dissatisfaction and turmoil in the future. We are certain that the situation could go beyond the control of respective stakeholders then. The ball is in court of the Royal government of Bhutan.

***********************************************************************************

20th August, 2007

Obituary

R.B. Basnet - a moderate reticent leader
R.K Dorji

The demise of Mr. R.B. Basnet on 18th August, 2007 is a great loss to the Bhutanese refugee community and the Bhutanese people. He was the President of Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP), a prominent leader, and very helpful towards the Bhutanese refugee community. Above all, his kind hearted, generous, amenable and humble disposition inspired his friends. He was soft spoken and reticent.

He hailed from a respectable family in Damphu, Cherang (Bhutan). After completing his studies, he joined the civil service in Bhutan. His last assignment with the Royal Government of Bhutan was as Managing Director of the State Trading Corporation of Bhutan. He was best of friends with my brother, Pema Wangdi.

When the citizenship crisis erupted in southern Bhutan in the late 1980s, a group of government officers led by Minister Om Pradhan and Mr. Teknath Rizal, along with Mr. R.B. Basnet and Mr. Bhim Subba submitted a petition to the King seeking a resolution of the problem. However, the situation in southern Bhutan deteriorated further due to the mishandling of the issue by a few immature self-proclaimed leaders. In this intriguing period, I met Mr. Basnet, Mr. Janga Bahadur and Mr. Harka Bahadur at Phuntsholing. I advised them to submit an apology on behalf of the community to the King in order to bring an end to the nascent problems in the region. Mr. Basnet heeded my advice and went to Thimphu where he discussed my suggestions with Mr. Om Pradhan. But Mr. Om Pradhan informed him that by then the time had elapsed to make amends. With the Government of Bhutan upping the suppression in southern Bhutan and casting suspicions over all Lhotshampas officials, Mr. Basnet's stay in Bhutan was unbearable and thus he was forced to flee for Nepal on 16th of June, 1991.

After departing from Phuntsholing, I went home to Samdrup Jongkhar. Unknown to me, a fabricated report alleging that I was in collusion with agitating Lhotshampas was already fed to the King by the trio of Gup Sonam Drukpa, Maj. Pem Tshering and Kunzang Namgyal. My friends warned me about my impeding arrest and urged me to flee Bhutan. But I stayed back because I felt there was nothing for me to run away from. On the 18th of May, 1991, I was arrested in Samdrup Jongkhar, taken to Thimphu and subjected to inhuman torture. After fifty days, I asked to sign a ‘devious release document’ in Dzongkha and English by the then Home Minister, Dago Tshering and released from detention. As soon as I reached home, I immediately went to Gawahati to treat my injuries sustained during the torture in imprisonment. From there, I fled to Nepal and reached Kathmandu on August 3, 1991.

Mr. Basnet, Mr. Bhim Subba, Mr. Rakesh Chhetri and Mr. Gurung met me on the 15th of August and shared each others' problems and recounted our past good-old days. In his capacity as President of Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP), he offered me the Vice-President ship of his party. I declined his good gesture because at that time I had submitted a petition to the King through the Chief Justice, Sonam Tobgay, and was awaiting a response. Non-reciprocation of my petition and the continuation of the stringent suppression in Bhutan compelled me to establish the Druk National Congress, along with Bhutanese friends in exiles and the blessing from our countrymen, to advocate for the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan.

Mr. Basnet and I held numerous meetings regarding Bhutan and what our contribution should be for its future. He always stressed for a peaceful and non-violent movement. I always held him in high esteem and respected his advice and suggestions.

In 1996, Bhutanese parties came together in a single platform to form the United Front for Democracy in Bhutan (UFD) to stress for democracy and to seek a just resolution of the refugee issue. I was elected as the Chairman of the UFD. In the capacity of UFD Chairman, I came to Delhi in 1997 to seek support from the Government and the people of India for our cause. I was arrested by the Indian authorities at the behest of the Royal Government of Bhutan to have me extradited to Bhutan. After spending fifty days at the Lampur Beggars' Home and fourteen months in judicial custody at Tihar Jail, the High Court of Delhi released me on bail in 1999, after finding no evidence to support the grounds on which the Royal Government of Bhutan had sought my extradition. After my release, I continued to maintained close contact with Mr. Basnet.

My last meeting with him was on April 16, 2007 at Siliguri, in West Bengal. We discussed issues about Bhutan for three hours. His was clear in his principle and once again advised me to always remain steadfast in the peaceful movement. Our next meeting to chalk out the plan for the coming year's activities was to be held in October this year at New Delhi. The meet is scheduled to draw in numerous supporting organisations and individuals. His absence will be severely felt.

I for one will miss my friend, counsel and colleague. I have lighted butter lamps and offered prayers and prayed for the peace of his pious soul.

What is card in with Bhutan election 2018

DNC hopes Indian Prime Minister to advice Monarch on Inclusive Democracy

20th August, 2007

Obituary

R.B. Basnet - a moderate reticent leader R.K Dorji

R.B. Basnet - a moderate reticent leader
R.K Dorji