The Common Forum: How Lawful Is It?

How useful are the ECB sponsored Common Forums that are being conducted all around the country?

DPT’s view is that it is "breaking up people" and that it is “unproductive” and "should be done away with". During a press briefing a few days back, Lyonpo Yeshey Zimba of DPT said:

“The whole process of politics becoming dirty and dangerous might be further expedited by this very noble intention”.

Contrary to what the DPT believes, other three parties - DCT, DNT and the PDP are unanimous in their assertion that the common forum is useful and productive. There is an extraordinary bit of commonality in the three parties’ opposition to the DPT’s views and their collective support for the perpetuation of the common forum.

However, when not a single voter turned up at the last common forum of South Thimphu, the candidates of some of the political parties had a mouthful to say.

DCT’s Kinley Dem was disappointed that “no voters showed up to listen to them”.

Dr. Lotay Tshering of DNT called the none-participation by voters as “very cold reaction from the literate lot of South Thimthrom”.

It is a pity that these candidates should react thus. Why should any voter show up to listen to them? If the voters chose not to attend any of their common forums, why should that be considered improper or not befitting of an educated person? Why is it mandatory that the voters should be inclined to listen to the candidates, if they have no interest to do so? Isn’t that their choice? Isn’t that what all these parties are harping on - that democracy is all about choices?

Talking of choices, from which provision of the law does the ECB draw its authority - to force this common forum on the political parties and the people of Bhutan? How justified are they in imposing their will on the political parties?

As far as I am concerned, the ECB is a regulatory/supervisory authority that is mandated to oversee the proper and lawful conduct of the elections - to ensure that every party is accorded an opportunity to contest in an atmosphere of equality and fair play. 

In my view, the ECB is exceeding their authority and mandate in deciding, on behalf of the political parties and the people of Bhutan, as to how they should vote or how the parties must canvass for votes and how best to project and promote their parties among the electorate.

The ECB should leave it to the politicians to decide as to how best to serve the interest of their own parties. The ECB cannot, on behalf of the parties, decide that common forum is the best way to promote their parties or their ideologies or the best strategy by which to garner support from the voters. As long as the parties function within the ECB’s guidelines which should be limited to issues relating to ethical and moral standards of how each political party must behave and campaign, the parties must be allowed the creativity and the operational freedom to conduct their campaigns as they choose. How can it be acceptable that a non-political entity like the ECB has the experience and the expertise to direct political parties as to how they should go about their job?

One of the strangest things about our democracy is that people who do not have a day’s experience in democracy is directing and making laws and subscribing ways and means as to how democracy and elections must be conducted.

The Common Forum: An Exercise in Futility

Listening to the speeches delivered by the Candidates of different political parties in the Common Fora around the country awakens in me a sense of Déjà vu … one that relates to my late grandmother.

As the most indulgent and favourite among her 170 odd grand children, my late grandmother would single me out - for special privilege. From her winter residence in Gaylegphug, she would issue her summons for me to travel all the way from Thimphu to Gaylegphu - in order that she may undertake her annual pilgrimage to Bumthang where she would spend her summer months - in prayer and penance.

Being way past 90, she was in no condition to undertake any physical activities. Regardless, she would unfailingly attend all the Buddhist sermons that would be conducted in and around Bumthang valley. Amid rain and sun and swirling dust she would sit, among a sea of human bodies, in rapt attention, listening to a tirade of Buddhist teachings delivered in words that were total Greek to her. To this day I have not understood the merit or the meaning of listening to words that made no sense.

Rumour has it that during the 80’s and the 90’s when the Royal High Court of Justice was pronouncing judgments on the prisoners who where being prosecuted for acts of terrorism and other anti-national activities, verdicts were being read out in Dzongkha - to culprits who were largely Lhotshampas who didn’t understand a word of the language. Then one day, His Majesty the Fourth Druk Gyalpo is supposed to have questioned the High Court on how justice was seen to be served - when the culprits who had to understand what they were being charged with - was being done so in a language that they didn’t understand.

That is exactly what is happening now - in the common fora being conducted all over the country.

On the one hand it is clearly evident that most of the speakers are unskilled in the Dzongkha language. Thus, majority of the speakers stutter and stammer and choke on their words, as they struggle with Dzongkha words that are quite obviously new and unfamiliar to themselves. Most candidates come through as shamefully incompetent. On the other hand, three fourths of the national audience - other than those in the western part of the country - are not Ngalongs. They are either Sharchops, Lhotshampas or Khenpas who do not speak or understand Dzongkha. Thus, you can see that most of the audience in the common fora are clueless about the halting words and disjointed sentences that drone away as they sit on the floor, like zombies.

It is a pity! Here is a case of the medium killing the message.

If the common forum is to serve a useful purpose; if it is to be a process of education for the voters, then these forums need to be conducted in a language that can be spoken with ease by the speakers and one that can be understood by the audience. Dzongkha language as a medium of communications is a poor and inappropriate choice - atleast for the Eastern, Central and Southern Dzongkhags. It is like speaking astronomy to an audience wholly comprised of medical students. If any sense is to be made, a Khengpa Candidate should speak Khengkha to a gathering of Khengpas! Otherwise the common forums are a total waste of time and resource.

Even worst, over time, there is a real danger of the voters suffering fatigue - from an overdose of bombardment of senseless words and unrealistic promises that are an insult to the Bhutanese people's intelligence. This could result in poor voter turn-out during the D-Day: the polling day of the General Rounds!

ECB Rule on Party Candidate Substitution - Post Primary Round

A notification from the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) issued on the 17th of May, 2013 attempts to clarify the rules concerning substitution of candidates by political parties - post Primary Round. For those of us for whom the issue of swapping candidates by political parties has become a matter of great concern, this is welcome news.

Having noticed the glaring synonymy in the line of arguments being pursued by candidates of some select parties during the common forum discussions that are currently under way around the country, it is now beyond doubt that certain political parties have, as rumoured, forged secret alliances - the sole purpose being to defeat a targeted rival party. This is a case of political parties sacrificing the interest of the country and the people of Bhutan - at the altar of their greed and ambition - to win at all costs. This is the brand of politicking we do not need and, thus, every Bhutanese is duty bound to combat such dishonorable behavior by political parties!

The ECB has now clarified that a candidate can be substituted only under following circumstances:

(a).  if a candidate dies;
(b).  if a candidate is unable to contest due to physical incapacitation;
(c).  if the candidature of a candidate is not accepted by the Returning Officers;
(d).  if the candidature of a candidate is cancelled on grounds of violation of the Laws
        during the course of election campaigning; and finally;

There is some ambiguity about the last rule that deals with a political party wishing to substitute a candidate from another political party:

(e).  if a political party, under Section 209 (c) of the Election Act, decides to
        register and nominate a candidate from another party that did not
        make it for the General Election with registration in
        original Party being forfeited.

The last item at (e) above leaves a bitter aftertaste - after all the sweetness. This particular clause veridates horse dealing - which vilifies clean and honorable politics.

The Section 209 (c) of the Election Act needs to be amended - to disallow cross-party candidate swapping. Also, the term “forfeited” is confusing. What if the original party has not accepted the forfeiture of the nominated candidate’s membership - for whatever reason? Is the ECB going to impose forceful forfeiture on the party of the candidate wishing to migrate to another party?

Attached below is the most CURRENT list of Candidates registered with the ECB by the four political parties qualified to contest in the Primary Rounds:

Case of Two Who Got Away - Part II

It took two days of strenuous deliberations for the eminent members of the Royal Civil Service Commission (RCSC) to arrive at a decision with respect to their two wayward members who, as admitted by RCSC Commissioner Bachu Phub Dorji, “have breached civil service code of conduct” in joining political parties while still being members of the Civil Service. The decision of the Commission, as reported in the Kuensel issue of 16th May, 2013, is that the two teachers should be asked to “compulsorily retire” with immediate effect.

Excuse me, but isn’t that exactly what the teachers have asked? - that they be retired from the Civil Service - in order that they can join politics? Why did the RCSC take two days to deliver a decision that is exactly what the teachers had all along been asking? And, by the way, giving the erring civil servants “full post-retirement benefits” is considered “major penalty”?

I think the RCSC is missing out on the long-term implications of their decision. I think they are setting a precedence that is going to haunt them over the years.

I can understand that the RCSC has been placed in a difficult position - given that a wrong decision could cause further chaos and confusion to the already bewildering state of affairs that is currently prevailing in the electoral process that is currently underway. Sadly, the RCSC's decision causes even more confusion. I think they could have come up with a more credible decision. A more sensible pronouncement could have redeemed the teachers of the ethical and moral baggage that they now have to carry around them. Since the teachers’ have been charged on grounds of inappropriate conduct, by default, the uprightness and integrity of the political parties who employed them will stand to be questioned.

Kuensel further quotes; “Chief election commissioner Dasho Kunzang Wangdi said their understanding of compulsory retirement was “honourable discharge” and that they welcome the news”.

What is implied is that “honourable discharge” is not tantamount to dismissal. In other words, the Chief Election Commissioner is implying that the two teachers have been consigned to the realm of the Purgatory - the middle realm. They are neither in hell nor in heaven. Thus, the ECB’s rule of disallowing “dismissed employees” from contesting in elections, would not be applied. 

That is all hunky-dory - but now we need to wait and see how the ECB will explain away that small matter surrounding the issue of the teachers being APOLITICAL beings and how then can still remain to be candidates of two political parties. Remember, even as I write this, the "honourable discharge" has not taken place.

Frankly, all this to me is an exercise in academia. For the good of the country and the electoral process, I would prefer that no big deal is made of the issue at this late stage. As far as I am concerned, given the lack of any credible choice, and the precariousness of our financial condition, I would prefer that we give the Primary Round a complete miss. However, since that is no longer plausible, I am personally in favour of the disqualified BKP being reinstated to contest the Primary Rounds. After all, it seems that BKP got disqualified because they were honorable enough to follow the ECB rules while, ironically, those parties that disregarded the rules, went on to qualify.

From all indications, the 2013 Parliamentary Elections is going to be an eventful one. If rumours are to be believed, even more bizarre occurrences are in the works. For size, try this: there is a strong rumour that secret alliances have already been forged between parties.

Those of you who are so eager to quote the Constitution should know that this is completely against the very spirit of our Constitution. In the coming weeks, this will be the subject that I will most actively broach on! Because, the very essence of our Constitution defining our democracy as a two-party Parliamentary Democracy is based on the fact that collusive party politics and horse-trading among political parties is the worst form of democracy.

Case of Two Who Got Away

The case of the two civil servants who have been allowed by the ECB to register themselves as candidates of two political parties contesting the Primary Rounds, while still being employed as civil servants, is most intriguing. It will be interesting to see how the ECB and the RCSC will resolve this issue and still remain within the bounds of their respective laws.

The ECB has taken the stand that their rules do not require a candidate to produce NOC from their last employers - atleast not for the Primary Round of Elections. Therefore, in their interpretation of the rules, the two civil servants need not produce NOC from their employers - the RCSC - implying that the ECB is still within the rules - in having accepted their candidatures.

Fair enough. However, the fact that these two civil servants have not yet been released from their government jobs means that they are still civil servants. Thus, even if it were to be accepted that no NOC is required to be filed by these two government employees, how can the ECB justify accepting the candidatures of two APOLITICAL persons to be registered as political party candidates? That is most definitely against their rules.

The third issue is that even if we accept that the Electoral Rules in force do not require the ECB to require candidates of political parties to file NOCs from their last employers; that even if we were to accept that two APOLITICAL persons were erroneously accepted as candidates to an elective office, what will the ECB's stand be - should the RCSC decide to terminate the two civil servants - on the grounds that (a) they have broken the rules of employment in the civil service and (b) that they have gone against the ECB Rules, as well as their own, which requires them to be apolitical while still being employed as civil servants?

We have to remember that one other rule of the ECB clearly states that no persons terminated or dismissed from their jobs can be accepted as a candidate of a political party.

It will also be interesting to see how the RCSC will rule. Their rule clearly states that it is an offense for a member of the civil service to be engaged in any form of political activity.

One of the reasons given out by candidates and political parties is that ECB has given them insufficient time to organize themselves as a result of which some of them were hard-pressed to come up with the required number of 47 candidates. That is rather lame - like the DPT President said in response to a similar question during the President’s Debate at the RTC, it would be shameful of any one to say that five years is too short a time in which to organize themselves.

If political parties do not have the wherewithal to organize 47 candidates in five years, I want to know how they are going to govern this country? Something serious to ponder about!

Anomaly of Constitutional Proportions

In the run up to the second parliamentary elections due in the next few weeks, one of the greatest threats facing the country today is that the wrong people may get voted into our Upper and Lower Houses of the Parliament.

The recently announced NC election results give me the shivers! What possible explanations can there be to justify the preference of a young growing buck over the vastly experienced, mature, wise and competent candidate like Dr. Jaggar Dorji? Obviously, the voters had very poor understanding of the competence level and the job description of a National Council Member.

In an effort to understand how such an abnormality can be allowed to be perpetrated, I sat down to re-read the Constitution - the mother of all laws. And therein lay the mystery! Read the following provisions in the Constitution:

The Constitution provides that any Bhutanese who is 25 years of age and has a college degree can become a Member of either the Upper, or the Lower House of the Parliament. To be elected to the highest body of the Legislative and the Executive, EXPERIENCE is not prerequisite! Any greenhorn, all of 25 years of age will do, THANK YOU!

By contrast, certain job markets in the country advertises job vacancies with the following requirements:

As you can see, Shearee Square Super Store will not give employment to a sweeper unless she/he has 3 years of sweeping experience and is aged between 30 to 45 years! Similarly, M/s Kelwang Pvt. Ltd. requires that any one wishing to apply for the post to drive one of their Vibratory Road Rollers or Tractors should have a minimum of 3 years’ experience.

What were our lawmakers thinking when they decided that a person aged 25 years and with experience less than that of a sweeper can be elected to our Parliament to legislate laws that will help govern the country?

This country is in serious trouble!

Kabney & Patang

The triviality to which the Kabney and Patang have been subjected to by some people in the aftermath of the dissolution of the first Parliament of Bhutan is most unfortunate. The donning of the Kabney and the Patang is governed by a rigid set of rules that is a part of our living culture and tradition. Other than as an act of affront, no person who has been awarded the Patang and Kabney may disrobe himself of the Kabney or the Patang as and when he pleases.

Symbolism
The Patang symbolizes authority and the Kabney denotes honour. Only the Druk Gyalpo bestows both these symbols of authority and honour upon the wearer. Thus, other than the King himself, no authority or institution has the power to order the disrobing of a legitimate recipient of these regalia. Since an honour conferred by the King is for life, the recipient wears the Kabney until the end of his life. However, since the Patang symbolizes authority, the wearer is required to relinquish it upon retirement from active official duty - when his authority ceases.

One of the seventeen Committee Members who authored the manual titled “DRIGLAM NAMZHAG” said that the Kabney and the Patang is so important that in the past, the death of every Nyi-Kyelma had to be reported to the King. Along with the report, the following items - known as ZHIDOE - belonging to the deceased had to be submitted to the King:

..   Bura Namza (Kabney)
..   Patang
..   Gho
..   Ptitala
..   Jandom
..   Phechung
..   Zhecha: Set of 2

The Dress Code
The wearing of the Gho, Namza (Kabney), Patang, Tshoglham and the Losil are all explicitly defined - for each rank: Minister, Deputy Minister, Nyi-Kyelma and the Royal Advisory Councilor. The manual titled “Driglam Namzhag” defines the following dress code for officials of the rank of Nyi-Kyelma and above:

Minister
The Minister’s Gho should be drawn up just below the knees. His Lagyen should be folded up one Tho and his Tego collar folded down two fingers width. The color of the Tshogyug can be any color. The Tshonglham Kor must be either light red or orange in color. The Kabney must be orange in color and should be twenty one Tho in length and six Tho in breadth. The left end of the Kabney must be folded into seven folds and drawn over the left shoulder. The end of the Patang must protrude a little below the Kabney. During an audience with the King, it is not permitted to place the hand on the Patang or over its handle.

Deputy Minister
A Deputy Minister must wear his Gho at knee length and the Lagyen should be folded up one Chatho. The Tego collar must be folded one Sor. The Tshogyug can be any color. The Tshoglham Kor must be light red. The sword must be worn on the right and the Losil on the left. The Kabney must be twenty one Tho in length and five Tho in breadth. A Deputy Minister is not entitled to the fold in the front of his Kabney like that of a Minister.

Nyi-Kyelma and Royal Advisory Councilors
The rights and privileges of the Nyi-Kyelma and the Royal Advisory Councilors are the same as those of the Deputy Minister but a Nyi-Kyelma will wear red Kabney while the Royal Advisory Councilors will wear blue Kabney. The color of their Tshoglham Kor will be red.

All the three Illustrations above were reproduced from the manual titled "DRIGLAM NAMZHAG"

   

Written Rule/Oral-Historical Record
In the absence of a written rule concerning the Kabney and the Patang, every one seems to want to put out a theory - most often, one that fits in with their own agenda. Because it suites their purpose, they chose to ignore the oral traditions and the historical records that should provide them with pointers on how to behave like cultured members of the Bhutanese society.

It is not entirely true that there are no written rules governing the Kabey and the Patang.

In its DRAFT version, "The Parliamentary Entitlements Act of the Kingdom of Bhutan, 2008" attempted to rationalize the issues surrounding the Kabney and the Patang but was excluded from the final version on the grounds that a separate discussion on the matter was needed. More likely, the item (proposed as Article 24 in the Draft Act) was removed from the final Act because the proposed Article undermined certain provisions contained in the Constitution.

The “Rules & Regulations of the Royal Advisory Council, 1993” which came into effect as of 1st August, 1993 has the following Provision:

CHAPTER V: TERM, RESIGNATION AND TERMINATION

5.6   On retirement or resignation, a Councillor is allowed to
        wear blue kabney without patang.

The above rule clearly proves that since the Kabney and the Patang was granted by His Majesty the King, in keeping with the custom and tradition, a retired Councilor was allowed to continue to wear his Kabney even after his term of office was over.

A Resolution of the 81st Session of the National Assembly states as follows:

3. Driglam Namzhag, National Dress and Culture

The National Assembly resolved that any civil servant who has been awarded Patang and Kabney by observing Phuensum Tshogpai Tendrel prior to the 81st session of the National Assembly can continue wearing Patang and Kabney even after their transfer to any other government organizations.

The National Assembly resolved that henceforth Patang and Kabney awarded other than by the His Majesty the King, specially designed to identify the position of the officers of the Dzongkhag Administrations, Judicial Courts and Dungkhags could be worn only during the occupation of such posts and should not wear if they were transferred to different ministries, departments and organizations.

There is absolutely no ambiguity in the above National Assembly Resolution. The Kabney and the Patang NOT awarded by His Majesty the King but were worn to distinguish different positions of the officers serving in the Dzongkhag Administrations, Judicial Courts and Dungkhags should be relinquished once they move out of these organizations.

In my understanding, there is no confusion - all those who received their Kabney and Patang from His Majesty the King should be honoured to continue to wear the Kabney - sans the Patang.

A Great Birding Trip!

I just returned from a two weeks birding trip to the East and Central parts of the country.

Bird photography becomes lot simpler during times when the birds are randy - during that time of the year when they experience their annual adrenaline rush. This is the time when they sing and dance - to attract mates so they can saw their wild oats. During this period of heightened libido, the birds tend to be careless and daring and expose themselves more frequently than they would otherwise. That is when they are easier to photograph.

In the Northern Hemisphere where we are located, the birds’ mating season start sometime during mid/end March.

By the time we hit the bird-rich areas in Central Bhutan, we were into mid April. To my dismay, I noticed that some birds were already into nest building and food gathering - signs that their mating season may be over. I was disheartened and yet, bird photography is all about dashed hopes and missed chances. But by the time we rounded up our trip in the East, I realized that this was my most rewarding birding trip. I got more “keepers” during this trip than I ever got in many of my earlier trips. Some of the birds I got this trip is posted below for your viewing pleasure - ENJOY!


Gold-naped Finch (Pyrrhoplectes epaulette). These birds are pretty common at altitudes from 1,600 - 3,965 Mtrs. I love these cute strong colored birds and have seen them many times before and yet, I have never been able to photograph them. This time my luck turned and I not only got the male and the female but also managed to get, what I suspect, is a male with an intermediate plumage.

I have never seen a similar image before - neither a photograph nor a sketch - so perhaps this is the first time a photo of this bird with this plumage has been captured.

Oriental White-eye (Zosterops palpebrosus) is a cute little bird and can be found everywhere. I have photographed it before but the one below is lot better - primarily because of its perch.

Hill Prinia (Prinia atrogularis). Bhutan has over 7 recorded Prinias but this is my first image of the bird. I photographed the same bird on a different perch - but I choose to post this image since I like this posture better although the other image is lot better - technically.

Rufous-bellied Niltava (Niltava sundara). This is a life bird for me - this is the first time I saw and photographed this bird. I also got the female - but choose not to post it since I don’t want to overwhelm my viewers with too many goodies :)

Satyr Tragopan (Tragopan satyra). I have seen both the male as well as the female of this bird species before but this is the first time I managed to photograph a female - and what a posture! I am told that Satyr Tragopan ranks as the tenth most beautiful bird of the world. As you can see, the colors on the male are simply awesome! But I particularly love the dainty posture of the female.

Crested Serpant Eagle (Spilornis cheela). I have photographed this bird many times before but I still choose to show this image - for the detail and the silky smooth bokeh of the image. It is not often that birds in the wild can be photographed with this kind of background.

Black-chinned Yuhina (Yuhina nigrimenta). This is yet another of my life birds. This is the first time I am seeing this bird and I am glad that I managed to photograph it so beautifully.

Ashy Bulbul (Hemixos flavala). I have seen this bird before but this is the first time I have been able to photograph it this well. As I said, this trip has been very rewarding!

Chestnut-winged Cuckoo (Clamator coromandus). And yet another first - a life tick as my friend and author/photographer from Bangladesh would say! I had never seen this bird before.

Grey Treepie (Dendrocitta formosae). I have seen this bird many times before but this is the first time I have been able to photograph it this well.

DEBT - Fuel of Growth

Seems like talking DEBT has suddenly come into vogue this season. Now it is Fareed Zakaria of the CNN who has this morning announced that China is in big, big trouble - debt trouble. He says that China’s total public and private debt is upwards of 200% of its total GDP. China in such huge debt???? Unbelievable!

Seems like being in debt has become fashionable. Even if that is not true, what is becoming apparent is that all modern economic activities are fueled by DEBT - both external as well as internal.

To be debt free is to put life on hold.

Gyalpoizhing Case Verdict: Court’s Contrarian View

Mongar Dzongkhag Court Justice Gembo Dorji seems to be in no doubt that the Kaja of 1987 was a “provisional law then”. By definition, “provisional law” means a law that is temporary in nature - something that is promulgated in the interim, something that is, at best, conditional and that which is subject to change when a more permanent and binding law is enacted. Such a law or Act was passed in 1999 titled “The Bhutan Municipality Act of 1999” which came into effect as of 28th July, 1999.

The Kaja under reference is in the form of a letter of transmission dated 31st March, 1987 and signed by the Secretary to His Majesty the IVth Druk Gyalpo, Dasho Pema Wangchen conveying His Majesty’s Kaja.

The Hon’ble Mongar Drangpoen is explicit in his ruling that the two defendants have been pronounced guilty for the sole reason that they did not adhere to the Royal Kaja of 1987. He categorically states that had the defendants abided by the Kaja, he would have acquitted them of all charges. In other words, in the view of the learned Judge, rest of the charges is trivial and unworthy of consideration.

Given such a ruling by the Mongar Dzongkhag Court, the case now takes on a different hue.

The Judge’s statement to the Kuensel is clear that the court did not consider the ACC’s original charges which pertained to official misconduct, acts of favoritism, failing to exercise due diligence, of having broken laws and exceeded authority or that the defendants impinged on the Municipal Act of 1999 etc. According to the learned Judge, the case is all about NOT ABIDING by the Sovereign’s Kaja.

Such a verdict raises certain questions:

1.  Does the court find the ACC’s charges baseless and therefore unworthy of consideration for the reason for which the court pursued a different line of argument?

2.  Does a Kaja, which the Justice agrees is “provisional” in nature and conveyed during a time when an appropriate Act was not in place, still remain valid even after an Act dealing with the issue has been enacted?

3.  During the time of the Monarchy, a Dzongda was appointed under the direct command of His Majesty the King. Their appointments were a Royal prerogative. Traditionally the Dzongdas assumed the role of the Monarch’s Kutsap in the Dzongkhags. I cannot recall any precedence where the Executive or the Judiciary has acted against the King’s appointees - unless His Majesty willed it.

4.  Is a wrong precedence being set when the ACC and the Judiciary is attempting to bring charges against persons who are appointees of the Druk Gyalpo? Are these institutions overstepping their authority?

In my view, it should be the prerogative of the King to act as He sees fit in the matter. The ACC should frame their charges and compile their findings and the Judiciary should render their interpretation of the laws and make a joint submission to the King - but leave it to His Majesty to pronounce the verdict and command the appropriate action to be taken.

Setting The Right Precedence II

The Bhutanese democracy is like a newborn whose umbilical cord has not yet been severed from the placenta that still remains lodged in the uterus of the mother. In the cycle of life, we are in the third stage of labor where only the fetus has been successfully delivered from the womb - rest of the birth process is still pending - meaning that the birth of the newborn is only half complete.

And yet, look at how far we have come - rather, look at how far we have gone.

The same people who glibly remind us that democracy has been a gift from the Throne are the same ones who are quick to look the gift horse in the mouth. These people who are so quick to toot the horn of democracy miss out on one fundamental truth: in Bhutan, democracy as an alternate form of governance is yet to see the light of day. However, democracy is here and we have to learn to live with it. Whether democracy is right for Bhutan, whether its time has arrived, whether the Bhutanese people are ready for it - all these questions must now remain mute. Bhutanese as a society must come together to make democracy work and we must draw upon our invisible bond - our culture - to make democracy work for us.

Unfortunately, however, we seem to be shedding our culture too fast, too early.

Democracy does not give the Bhutanese people an excuse to lose sight of our culture. Our moral values, our lifestyle, our religion, the very way we think and behave have been guided and shaped by our culture spanning over many centuries. Thus, it seems impossible that we can forget our culture in a span of less than five years. And yet, some recent incidences indicate that we are indeed loosing site of our value system.

Some wrong precedences are being set, under the democratic system. The ongoing legal case involving Gyalpoizhing land allotment is a case in point.

This is a case that is close to two decades old. It happened during an era when things were done differently; when ground realities were not as simple or as straightforward. It happened during a time when unconventional means had to be employed to make things happen, to move things forward. The compulsions under which past administrations performed is something beyond the fathoming of the present lot of people.

More importantly, the present democratic setup does not have the moral authority to question an incident that happened at a time when the administration was under the country’s most competent and best loved monarch.

Digging the past is not a winning way for Bhutan. It only serves to further the cause of some evil people who do not wish well for the country. The Bhutanese people ought to remember that we have arrived where we are today because not every thing that went on in the past was wrong or undesirable.

The past is an integral and an inseparable part of our present, and future. Not even God has the competence to alter the past - which is exactly how it should be. In fact, it is dangerous to attempt to do so - because in trying to do so, we are likely to peril our present and endanger our future.

As I have mentioned in one of my earlier posts, we neither have the financial resource nor the manpower to waste on digging up the past. We would do well to focus on our present and our future problems, which are substantial.

Gyalpoizhing case is a dangerous precedence. Everyone must work hard to put this distasteful matter behind us. If not, we can be sure that there will be a thousand similar cases that will surface to haunt us to eternity.

Let us not play into the hands of the evil mongers.

Setting The Right Precedence

Whether spoken with all the best intentions or merely to make an impact, one cannot help but detect a tinge of pomposity when someone utters the words “setting the right precedence”. Even worst, if one were to go by the recent examples of “setting of right precedence”, it is quite obvious that some select Bhutanese people and institutions suffer from a severe case of - Cognitive Dissonance - distorted perception.

Some seven years back, as a member of the SENetwork of the UNDP, I was invited to write my thoughts on “How to be PREPARED for rural-urban migration” by the Consultant working on a report to suggest ways and means to battle rural-urban migration. I offered the view that “being prepared” was taking the defeatist attitude and that the better way to solve the problem was to propose ways and means that would aim at “How to PREVENT rural-urban migration”. My views did not fit in with their scheme of things, so my article was not published on grounds that it was too radical!

About 3-4 weeks back, someone in the BBS TV invited me to be a member of the panel in a discussion titled “Is Corruption Getting Institutionalized?” being anchored by Dawa in his very popular TalkShow - “Dawai Kudroen”. I thanked the person for the honor and the opportunity to come on board the TalkShow but made my excuses on some pretext and did not participate in the show. The reason was that I would have been a willing participant - if the question was “Why is Corruption Getting Institutionalized?”.

Corruption getting institutionalized is old hat - the more pertinent question to ask is - WHY is corruption getting institutionalized?.

By the same token, the question to ask is not whether we are setting the right precedence but what exactly is the right precedence to set?

Today a large number of Bhutanese believe that with the advent of democracy, there is a sea change in Bhutan. As far as I can see and understand, other than the parliamentary elections and the local government elections, the change has been constant. This is how it should be. For, it is my belief that good and useful change must be tempered by continuity.

In my view, the biggest danger facing Bhutan is that some persons and institutions may take their powers too far. We need to caution them that the police officer may be given a gun to carry around but he does not have the licence to kill. Certain powers are designed to act as deterrents rather than as weapons of murder. 

............... to be continued

Robotic Spams – HELP!

A reader - Peldhen Sonam Nima (PSN) - made a comment on my post titled “Economic Crisis or Spending Fatigue?” and made a request to disable the Word Verification process - on the grounds that it made commenting cumbersome. I promptly complied and disabled the need for the Word Verification process at the end of a comment, before the comment can be submitted. 

BAD MOVE!!! 

Since then, my Blog posts have been lambasted with dozens of SPAMs. Fortunately, I moderate the comments - in the sense that I require every comment to be authorized by me - good, bad and the ugly. Therefore, the readers do not get to see all the trash being posted on my Blog because I do not allow their publication.

I suspected that it must be ROBOTIC SPAMMING. The spamming started with the deactivation of the Word Verification process - meaning that something or someone cannot spam if he/she/it is required to type a set of words. In an effort to understand what this was all about, I Googled and stumbled upon the following:

“Robotic spam are spam comments created by automated scripts/bots. They contribute to over 99% of comment spam in blogs. Comment spam has gained prominence due to the ease with which spamming operations can be scripted for large-scale campaigns. Most robotic spams either try to spam by submitting comment form or by using trackbacks. Comment Guard Pro stops all kind of robotic spams from reaching your blog”. 

I have a mind to reactive the Word Verification requirement - once again. But I wonder if I should - because that would inconvenience my readers and commentators. Well I think for now, I will keep it disabled since if any one were to suffer inconvenience - it might as well be me - so my readers can have an enjoyable experience. I will keep on removing the SPAMs as they appear. If it gets too difficult, I will have to think of installing the software mentioned above - Comment Guard Pro. But I do not have a Credit Card to make the purchase!!!! GRRRRR.

I GIVE UP!!!!. The spamming has gotten too heavy .... so I am reinstating the Word Verification.

The Human Creative Mind Is Still King

I pursue a purist form of photography. This means that I like to photograph and present my subjects in its most natural form - as God made them. That is probably why, I loathe doing human portraiture because the modern face is most often subjected to melodramatic transformations through the use of massive doses of complex chemical compounds.

In 99.999% of my photographs, you will also not see any objects of modern manufacture such as cars, lamp posts, hoardings and billboards. I like to photograph objects of beauty and harmony - one that gives a viewer a sense of calm and tranquility, of beauty and space, a feeling of unbridled freedom and liberty.

But in these digital times when technology is threatening to crush human artistry, as in everything else, purists like me need to come to terms with the fact that keeping step with the changing trends is critical. It is that or, I have to be prepared to be left behind.

Photography used to be about patience, technical skill, hard work and a person’s inherent artistic qualities. No longer. It is now all about one’s skill at manipulation in the digital darkroom. One no longer needs to be a skilled photographer but a competent digital darkroom specialist. One has to be good at photographic manipulation software - you need no other skill to churn out breathtaking photographs.

A skillful Adobe PhotoShoper can, most realistically, park the DrukAir’s jet in the parking lot of Tashichho Dzong. The Tashi Taj, swarmed from all around by a cluster of concrete buildings, can be shown to be surrounded with lush green pine trees! Recently, a digital camera manufacturer announced a camera that can actually alter all the points of focus and a photograph's perspectives - on the computer, post shooting!

The following photograph shows a girl’s photo framed inside a silk/brocade mount. That is the best I can do - by way of manipulation. Am I going to learn any further digital tricks?

Nope - because I believe that it is the human mind that has created these masterful digital manipulation tools. That means that the human mind is still the MASTER CREATOR. No amount of digital mastery can beat the creativity of the human mind.

Is it possible to create - digitally - the hauntingly sombre look of the girl in the photo? IMPOSSIBLE!

This pretty little girl was photographed in her classroom at Jigme Losel School, Chubachu

Taking Long to Write Short

Ms. Madeline Drexler, an award winning author and editor at the Harvard Public Health Review and a Fellow at the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism writes to me to explain the art of effective writing. The following is how she explains it to me:
 ......................................

--- “Shorter is better aesthetically, as well. The text will be more dynamic, it will move more swiftly. It actually takes more time to write sharp and pithy prose - rewriting and rewriting - but the final product is stronger and more artful.

The literary quote that has been ascribed to Samuel Johnson, Mark Twain, Winston Churchill, and others goes like this:

Forgive me for writing such a long letter. I didn't have time to be brief."

......................................

How true! The best way to hold the attention of your readers and to ensure that they have the patience to read through your writing to its end, is to keep your writing precise and as short as you can make it. Long-winding writings tend to lose readers mid way.

Economic Crisis or Spending Fatigue?

The permeation of the Bhutanese lingua franca, sometime towards the middle of 2012, by a two-letters term - economic crisis - has me baffled completely. Talk to any Bhutanese - educated, uneducated and anyone in between and he/she will tell you that the country is going through a severe “economic crisis”.

Ask them why we have a severe Indian Rupee shortage and they will tell you it is because of our economic crisis. Ask them why the banks have stopped giving out loans and they will grimly tell you that the country’s economy is in a bad way. Ask them why the DPT government will not win the upcoming elections with the same kind of resounding victory as they did in 2008, they will give the reason that it will be because the economy did poorly under their term. Ask any Bhutanese why the government has suspended the import of vehicles and they will tell you - it is because we are going through an economic crisis.

Every Bhutanese is quite merrily blaming the “economic crisis” for all our ongoing woes. However, ask them to explain "how" our “economic crisis” is at the core of our problems and they are perplexed - they do a vigorous head scratching! They have simply no idea why they have been parroting the belief that our troubles are due to our “economic crisis”.

Do we really have an economic crisis? Nope, we MOST DEFINITELY DO NOT! On the contrary, published figures show that we are among the top performers in the region, in terms of GDP growth. Our growth rate was: 6.7% in 2009; 10.6% in 2010; 5.9% in 2011 and it is estimated that we will achieve a growth rate in access of 7% for the year 2012.

So then who is putting out this ludicrous idea that we have an economic crisis? The answer: by people who are clueless about what constitutes economic crisis and by those who wish to paint a grim picture of the country and the performance of the government! They simply have no idea what the term means or, even if they do, they are deliberately spreading the misconception.

Two of our most important economic activities are related to those of tourism and hydro-power projects. Thank you very much but both of these sectors are hail and hearty - in fact, they have been growing by leaps and bounds. Our industrial output has not fallen; no factories have failed; there has been no labor unrest that hampered production. The government of India has not reneged on their committed financial support. So then, what is our problem?

In my understanding, we have been subjected to a disorder that can best be described as: SPENDING FATIGUE!!

People seem to be totally oblivious to the fact that the country has had to undertake colossal expenditures in the short span of the last four years - expenditures that were a severe drain on our reserves and yet, those that had to be made.

We had two very expensive (uncontrolled and lavish spending) elections to the Upper and the Lower Houses of the Parliament. We had a series of local government elections. We had a Centenary Celebrations. We had to Crown a King. We had a Royal Wedding. We had to host a SAARC Submit. If all that were not enough, we suffered unprecedented natural calamities, one after the other, all year round. All these were unavoidable expenses but they certainly caused a severe and destabilizing strain on our finances.

Please do not bell the wrong cat.

Changlemithang Football Ground

With the resurfacing of the football ground at the Changlemithang Stadium with artificial grass, playing football should be great. I did not see any policemen standing at the gates so I did not think that I would be denied entry into the grounds. The field looked simply great! I took some photos which is being posted here for your pleasure! Let me warn you though that I had the wrong camera. Regardless, I think the photos are not too bad, as a first attempt.

As long as some strange people do not take it upon themselves to impose a blanket ban on photography of the footballing events of the future, I think I want to go more often to catch some action.

 

Are Constitutional Bodies Democratic Institutions?

The public perception, and that of my own, is that the Constitutional bodies were created to safeguard the democratic process and for the provision of effective check and balance under a brand new and an unfamiliar system of governance. But recent cases of checks provided by some of the Constitutional bodies seem to be designed entirely to upset the balance.

In their eagerness to flex their unbridled muscles, irrespective of whether their individual Acts empower them or not, what has clearly been demonstrated by their actions is that they have no respect for the democratic process. Or, rather, these Constitutional bodies seem to have been empowered to function outside the democratic norm.

Yesterday afternoon a friend tells me that as of the beginning of January 2013, the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) has imposed a complete ban on the performance of annual Chokus – until the end of the upcoming elections and the declaration of its results. As a result, I am told that a large number of households around the country are in a frenzy to perform their annual Choku this month - a Dha-nag (inauspicious month)! Traditionally, it would be anathema to conduct Choku during a Dha-nag.

On the one hand the ECB has infringed on the fundamental right of the individual and the society to a free and fair practice of their religious and cultural traditions. On the other, they have, knowingly or unknowingly, forced the people to digress from centuries old religious belief - that conducting Choku during a Dha-nag is inauspicious and earns bad Karma. It is nothing short of blasphemy, for those who are believers.

I do understand the logic behind the ECB’s concerns. However, what is the rationale behind attacking only the religious and cultural practice of the Buddhists in Bhutan? What of the holding of the Christian Mass and the performance of Hindu Pujas, where a large number of people congregate too? What of other social events such as: archery tournaments, marriages, celebration of births and deaths, promotions, sporting events, National Day celebrations, Tsechus and Dromchoes, etc.? Is the ECB going to ban those too?

To me it seems like the more intelligent and reasonable way would be to issue a rule saying that politicking during such events would not be allowed. Completely banning such events is akin to desecrating the female womb on the grounds that it can foment a potential miscreant.

At best, the ECB would have to manage and oversee less than 400,000 voters on the day of the polling. For such a minuscule number, it seems like they are going completely overboard. I am told that some universities abroad have that kind of student enrollment.

No doubt, some institutions may be empowered with extremely formidable powers. Regardless, it is important for these institutions and the persons heading those institutions to realize that certain powers should be exercised only in the rarest of rare situations.

You are not a rich man because you have millions hoarded away in a secret vault - but because you have enough to give to those who stand in need. You are not a powerful man because you wield so much power - but because you have the sensibility and wisdom to contain those powers - for the good and benefit of those whom you have been elected to serve.

105th National Day Celebrations: Photography Not Allowed!

The following photograph of multicolored ribbons flying off from atop the floodlight post inside the Changlemithang is the sum total of the photograph I have of the 105th National Day celebrations that is currently under way at the Changlemithang Stadium today. It was shot from outside the grounds.

The security people manning the stadium gates had strict instructions not to allow any cameras inside the stadium. I had no prior knowledge of such a prohibition being imposed although, I had a premonition of sorts when a photographer friend asked me if I had a license to carry a camera into the grounds. He said that he was denied entry into the grounds so was walking back to his car to deposit his camera. I had no intensions of walking back to my car, which was parked about 2 kms away.

I had parked my car at the Tarayana Centre since there was no parking space anywhere else. I walked down the road passing the Centenary Market and then on to the lower gates of the stadium. I was not allowed access and was told to enter through the upper gates. So I walked all the way to the Lungtenzampa bridge and then turned right to try and gain access through the upper gates a little further away from the Kisa Hotel.

Upon reaching the gates, I was told that I cannot enter with my camera.  I wasn’t alone - there was another elderly Bhutanese with a point-and-shoot camera slung over his neck and 4 tourists with cameras. They too were denied entry. The tourists were trying to call their guide to come and collect their cameras - only to find that the cellphone network had been shut down. One of them walked away to look for the driver and the guide.

The Bhutanese guy was trying to give his assurance to the security personnel that he would not take photos but that his family had already gone in and would be looking for him and would be worried if he didn’t show up. He reasoned that some of the expensive mobile phones had lot higher resolution than is camera. He argued that if photography was not allowed, they should disallow mobile phones as well. All that fell on deaf ears.

I asked the security personnel if he would allow me in since I hold a Media Card issued by the BICMA. He hadn’t heard of any such Card and, in any event, he said he had no instructions to allow Card holders in.

Bhutan must take great pride in being the only country in the world where a very public event, in a very public space is out of bounds for photographers and photography.

After I got thrown out of the National Assembly Hall some three years ago by the agents of the ROM, I completely stopped going to public functions and events because I am certainly not looking forward to another run in with them. Today too I didn’t want to go but the day was beautifully clear and I wanted one picture - just one - of the huge crowd on the stands with the blue skies in the background. No such luck! So I walked back all the way to my car and, enroute, I shot the photograph of the multicolored ribbons flapping in the winds. 

I wish some one with brains would realize that imposing blanket bans on people is the easy way out to a problem. It is a way out where the people responsible are too lazy to put in hard work and imagination and would rather inconvenience the general public by resorting to imposing bans. Banning is not the answer. Regulating is - if at all it were required. Will someone please realize this soon, before some incident takes place? What the hell is the logic behind banning photography of a very public event, in a very public and open space?

Seriously, public functions in Bhutan are becoming a public nuisance!