A Fitting Ode To The Fallen Soldiers Of Destiny

Most are wont to tell us that winning and losing is a way of life. Alas! for those who are given to entering a battle with the sole intention to win, being flippant about losing cannot offer any solace. After all I do not believe that losing was in the scheme of things. Thus, I can understand the pain of the finality of loss when it comes staring you in the face.

Each of us have our own choices and preferences – we do not need to explain to anyone why we make those choices – it is a strictly personal matter. No one has the right to tell us that our choices and preferences are wrong – we have our own set of reasons, and values, that we believe are good for us. And yet, after all the bravado – losing is still a painful experience, and those of us who understand the emotion, we empathize with those who lost. And, it appears that some of us do have the guts to express our solidarity with the fallen heroes - even if we do fall far short of openly supporting them in their moment of grief. The following editorial by Business Bhutan dated 2nd December, 2023 is a case in point:

I whole-heartedly second the editorial!

When the Bhutanese people finally settle down from their frenzy of misplaced sense of patriotism and misguided show of camaraderie, and when they have the time to sift through the list of DNT’s achievements – provided they do so with a lens that is not tainted with greed or self-interest, a picture will emerge where the DNT government under the leadership of Dr. Lotay Tshering will stand tall – as a most courageous government who had the gallantry to rise above politics. They were a government that was most severely tested – they were struck with all sorts of calamities - both natural and man-made. From where I stand, in less than two and half years’ time in which they had to make their mark, their performance was nothing short of praiseworthy!

If they lacked the resource competence to implement lofty, star-spangled programs, they made up for it by being able to courageously dismantle many evils that had permeated into our system of governance. I have said this many a times before – greatness is not necessarily about doing – it is also, often times, about undoing!

I am not serenading the DNT government – but sending them off with a song of praise worthy of the valiant warriors who fought a winning battle for the country and the people of Bhutan – at a time when mightier nations buckled under the burden of an invisible, stealthy ravager. No doubt, they had a most competent Commander to guide them in their many battles during the COVID-19 pandemic. But what is undeniable is that the DNT as a team was comprised of the most competent and qualified foot soldiers who did not fail their Commander-In-Chief - in every one of His directives. The world record Bhutan set during the COVID-19 pandemic was possible because the DNT cohort served the King and the people with unflinching dedication and wholehearted commitment, without question or doubt, or skepticism. For that alone – the DNT government was a praise-worthy government deserving of our gratitude. The point that whether any other government would have excelled, as they did - given the challenges - will have to remain mute at this point in time.

But at the end, Dr. Lotay and his DNT team are nothing more than instruments of destiny through whom the will of Providence was conveyed and executed. As destined, they played out their role to the hilt. Importantly, they lived out their usefulness to society - their deed is done. And, in keeping with the ways of the world, it is now time to consign them to history and obscurity.

Seemingly they walk away - spent and wasted - with unsure gait and stooped posture. But not even God can deprive them of their just reward – the reward that in the hearts and minds of the wise and the knowledgeable, the truth of their service will remain forever etched. The trackless sands of time may not hold their footprints – but that wasn’t their purpose anyway.

Come 9th of January, 2024 Providence will once again guide our fingers to elect yet another equally competent bunch of foot soldiers to uphold, preserve and perpetuate the good work left behind by the DNT. I pray that if nothing, they have the fortitude to safeguard - even shield - the many edifices of courage and selflessness that has been the hallmark of the DNT government headed by Dr. Lotay Tshering.

If that happens, it will be my honor to once again burn the midnight oil - to yet again compose another eulogy at the end of five years from now.

Bhutan’s Unique Democracy

I have been Googling and Googling and Googling … but uncle Google has not been very forthcoming to my queries.

I have been Googling to find out if there was ever a moment in the many thousands of years of democratic culture - where a regulator required political entities to have their party manifestoes appraised and approved by a bunch of shadowy, clandestine persons of unknown origin and competence – before the parties are allowed to speak of them to their electorate. I cannot find such a record – not a single one since the birth of the concept of democracy in ancient Athens around circa 508 BCE.

Political Parties' Manifestoes: Approved, endorsed and sanctified by a bunch of shadowy, clandestine persons of unknown origin and competence

I am of the view that the ECB is utterly confused about their role and responsibilities. But come to think of it – if the ECB can be so unashamed about what they are doing, can it be that we may be the ones who are in confusion, and not them? Hmmmmm looks like this calls for some serious homework – I think I need to read up the Constitution to see what the real deal is.

But for now, it is pretty strange that the ECB announces a democratic election while, at the same time, forbidding the political parties from saying anything that is not approved and authorized by the ECB to be told the electorate. That is democracy?????

Thou shalt not spake beyond what is authorized 

So what are our political parties – puppets and mouth pieces of the ECB?

Damn!! I think I may have been wrong all this while – I think Bhutan and the Bhutanese people may be, after all, UNIQUE as we unabashedly and repeatedly claim we are!

The Lambs Have Submitted

The KUENSEL has it on record that it is now all signed, sealed and delivered - on the 28th of September, 2023. As dictated, all the five political parties hoping to contest the upcoming 4th National Assembly Elections have submitted their party manifestos to the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) - for scrutiny, appraisal and final approval. And, while the political parties await their instructions from the ECB as to what to say, how to say, and the final directions on how best they might put forward their shackled feet, the last of the 3rd Parliament’s final session is scheduled to begin today. But as they say in the comic books, the drama and theatre must go on.

Things are looking bleak: our political parties appear to be without any spines - not a squeak has been heard from them, in protest of the usurpation of their most fundamental rights. It is rather unsettling - if they are incapable of protecting their most basic rights, how can they convince us that they have it in them to protect ours?

Buckling under the burden of the Controller

From all indications, the voter turnout this time round is likely to hit rock bottom - resulting from a number of factors, such as large scale exodus of registered voters to third countries, relocation of voters from their homes to places of their current domicile, denial of the opportunity to cast Postal Ballots by the floating population and, finally, disillusionment in the democratic system and processes.

However, in truth, that is not really my worry. I mean, take a hard look at the landscape - scan the horizon - and you will find that democracy is still an unfamiliar term to the majority of the Bhutanese rural population who really matter - it is simply not within their scheme of things! For them the Kidu still flows from the Throne. It is only to a motley of people in Thimphu to whom democracy resembles something akin to a wiggling worm on the muddy floor.

To me what is unnerving is that we are steadily emerging as a race of people who speak things that we do not mean - we do things we are not supposed to do; we say we are a democracy but democratic institutions are the first ones to deny people the most basic of democratic rights. We say we are a GNH country, we say we are pristine, that we are beautiful, we say we are God-fearing and religious – but there is no indication that we are most of them, if any at all.

Those in the leadership positions are Dashos and not Dakshos – a self-serving bunch who routinely ignore the relationship between cause and effect.

Today the country is aspiring for a stratospheric rise in wealth acquisition and technological advancement and competence. Our Monarch has laid out a stupendous, bold dream - a once in a millennium plan to hit our proverbial High Note. A plan at this scale is likely to take few years before it can be brought to fruition. But while that is being overseen under the watchful eyes of the King, side-by-side, it is imperative that the people and the government of Bhutan project an image that permeates confidence, political stability, good governance, dependability, reliability, and trustworthiness. It will go a long way in winning over investors and supporters - to take a second look at what we say we have on offer for them. Words are so much hot air - actions matter!

But what do we do? We shove undemocratic requirements down the throats of the cowering political leaders! I am aghast that there is not a single person in the ECB with the creativity to think up something by which they can have their cake and eat it at the same time. Why does it have to be the gory, the unlawful, the unethical and the tyrannical?

Trust me, the international community are a hyper sensitive lot - they watch and take note of every one of our missteps. They will factor in all that - when they do their sums to decide whether or not, Bhutan is worth it! And, that is when such behaviors as those of the ECB is going to cost us dearly!

We have to be particularly sensitive in what we do at home - even more so when we are muddying the waters with the big boys in the international arena.

March of Democracy

The Kingdom of Bhutan is one of the world’s five youngest democracies. That is not quite unusual in itself - what is unique about it is that unlike elsewhere in the world when democracy came into being caused by turmoil and conflict - at the cost of bloodshed and mayhem, our democracy came at a time when there was peace and tranquility. It was not the dissatisfied commoners but our ruling monarchy that willed it - borne of uncommon wisdom and realism. It was an act in self-preservation - to ensure that the state of Bhutan and the Bhutanese race remain in perpetuity - until end of time.

It was not expected that our democratic journey would be without hurdles – we are, after all, charting a new and untreaded path. What was unexpected is that the very organization that was instituted even before the start of democratization would attempt to derail a meticulously and patiently planned journey that began some 70 years earlier. Some of the recent announcements by the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) point to the possibility that we could jeopardize all that we have achieved in the past many decades.

It is sad - the ECB seems to lack persons with any institutional memory. Obviously they are unaware that they were among the first 4-5 institutions that were specifically established to usher in, and promote, democratic norms - by His Majesty the IVth King when He lifted the ban on formation of political parties, and set into motion the process of political reforms, in the early 2000s. The other institutions that were set up at the cusp of the cross-over from absolute to democratic constitutional monarchy, and introduction of rule by popular vote, were:

Office of the Attorney General                         - 1999

National Judicial Commission                         - 2001

Anti-Corruption Commission                         - 2006

Druk Holding & Investment Limited (DHI) - 2007

For the past seventy (70) years our monarchs have been methodically and patiently planning the devolution of rule to a system of governance - based on the will of the people. The ECB seems clueless about this and, in their ignorance they seem to act in tangent to the very unique endeavors of our successive monarchs.

In less than a year since His crowning in 1952, His Majesty the Third King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck established the National Assembly of Bhutan - in the year 1953. With the creation of that democratic institution, Bhutanese people’s march towards democracy was set into motion - by the father of modern Bhutan.

His Majesty Druk Gyalpo Jigme Dorji Wangchuck - father of modern Bhutan started the democratization process in 1953.

In 1968 His Majesty the IIIrd Druk Gyalpo voluntarily relinquished His veto right in the National Assembly. He went one step further by introducing a triennial Vote of Confidence in the King - something totally unique and unheard of in the world of absolute monarchies around the world.

In 1981, the IVth Druk Gyalpo introduced the decentralization policy - to enable active participation by the people - in the process of policy formulation and implementation.

To further decentralize governance and the decision making process, 1988/89 saw the appointment of four Zonal Administrators – one each in Chhukha (Zone I), Tsirang (Zone II), Gelephu (Zone III) and Yonphula (Zone IV).

In 1991, even greater decentralization was implemented. Block Development Committees were set up in all of the country’s Blocks. This allowed for direct participation by the people and greater autonomy in allocating financial resources for developmental projects - determined by the people. By allowing the people the right for self-determination, the culture of democratic process was slowly but surely being imbued in the psyche of the Bhutanese people.

In July 1998 His Majesty the IVth Druk Gyalpo issued a Royal edict devolving His executive powers, and stepping down as head of government. The Council of Ministers earlier appointed by Him was dissolved - to pave way for the democratic election of the Ministers by the Members of the National Assembly, elected by the people.

In June of 2007, the historic democratic elections were announced - scheduled for 24th March, 2008.

The meticulous and patient implementation of the many democratic processes described above amply demonstrate that our Kings have worked tirelessly and with commitment and patience, to bring about genuine reforms and political modernization for the preservation of the Bhutanese state and people.

It may not be too late to remind the ECB that they are digressing from their principal duty and function. The world has viewed the Bhutanese democratic process as something extraordinarily unique and exemplary. We have done the absolute right things in our long and laborious journey to arrive where we have. It would be catastrophic to allow it all to go asunder – we risk the danger of projecting an image that is inconsistent with our spoken and written words.

Democracy’s Death Knell

Exactly forty two (42) days back, on August 2, 2023 the Kuensel informed the nation of the Election Commission of Bhutan’s (ECB’s) announcement that they would put in place a Committee that would assess the appropriateness of the Manifestos of the five political parties contesting the upcoming elections. The political parties have until 28th of September 2023 to submit their Manifestos for authorization /approval/endorsement by the ECB.

Close on its heels, barely twenty eight (28) days after the earlier announcement, the Kuensel reported yet another commandment from the House of Democracy - on 30th August, 2023 - that the ECB would be disallowing door-to-door campaigning by the political parties.

With the two important democratic processes firmly sealed and locked away securely, we are now all set to go to the polls. The last item that remains on the agenda is for the political party leaders to be ushered into their caves with the instruction that they may now start to sound their drumbeats and trumpet calls - that they are at last free to pronounce their respective ECB authorized party Manifestos.

In all likelihood this is how the Bhutanese political party leaders are expected to send out their bugle call to their voters to attend their party meetings where they would read out their ECB sanctioned party Manifestos

Pray, tell me, what kind of message does such pronouncements by the custodians of all that is fair and good in a democracy, send out to the world about the stability of our governance, our commitment to self determination, freedom of choice, and respect for the will of the people?

Particularly at a time when our Monarch is trying His hardest to propel the country to heights never even attempted before, what kind of promise do we hold for the potential global investors whom we hope to cajole and entice to invest in our country and its potential? Political stability, good governance, people with kindled spirits - a society capable of progressive thinking - these are some of the qualifying benchmarks by which the global community will judge us - it will not be on the repeated claim that we are a unique breed of people. It will not be because we are given to suppressive tendencies at the most inopportune moments.

A political party’s Manifesto is a most sacrosanct document – each of them would believe that it will set them apart from the common pack – on it will pivot their party’s very reputation, success and appeal to their voters. IT WILL DEFINE THE PARTY ITSELF! Thus, it is unlawful and unfair that the ECB require the parties to reveal and discuss their manifestos with them, or with a bunch of people appointed by them whose credentials would be, at best, suspect.

Who assures the confidentiality of the documents? Does the ECB have the competence to justify their stand on why a certain campaign promise is untenable? No law requires a political party to reveal their funding sources to implement a campaign promise. Thus no political party may be subjected to cross-examination on the issue.

In any event, who told them that they hold monopoly over intelligence and smartness - over those of the political parties and the people of Bhutan? I think it is best to leave the game of politics to the people engaged in politics on a daily basis. Novices acting God could very well prove to be disastrous.

Something that intrigues me is this: will the ECB have overriding authority on a sitting government? If not how can they prevent the elected government to NOT DO what they had earlier ruled was not allowed - or FORCE THEM TO DO what was promised - during the time of the campaigning? On the other hand, who gave the ECB the authority to decide what is workable and what is not? The political parties are not answerable to the ECB - they are to the people of Bhutan. And, if the people decide that a political party’s campaign promises are doable - they make the decision - not the ECB.

But in all this madness, what sticks out like a sore thumb ---- is the fact that not a single political party has risen to the occasion – to protect what is legitimately in their interest to do so. This leaves us with the question:

If these political parties are proving to be incompetent in protecting their own interests, why should we trust that they have it in them to protect the interest of the people of Bhutan?

The Despots Are At It, Yet Again!

The progenitors of Bhutan’s democracy are surely shedding tears of anguish at the way our democracy is shaping out. Now the Election Commission has willed that the political parties and their candidates “do not have to go for door-to-door campaign during the election period”.

I wonder if that is a round-about way of suggesting that the electorate should instead go to the doorsteps of the political party candidates to listen to their campaign, which is an absolute and essential part of the election process?

Jokes aside, I had suggested early this year that “Elections Can Wait” - that we should consider deferring the 4th elections to a more suitable time when we have recovered from the ongoing crisis inflicted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

I mean how many Bhutanese - the residual population after the exodus to Australia - have the inclination, or the resources, to spend money behind a trip to their village homes to cast their votes?

It is a pity that the Election Commission has thought up everything else that is anti-democracy but not that which should help the country see a robust turnout during the elections. The least the Election Commission could have done is - made it possible for voters to be able to vote from the places where they are currently domiciled - instead of having to travel long distances to cast their votes. They should have allowed Postal Ballot - for the Bhutanese diaspora. These cost-effective measures would have assured good turnout during the elections.

But frankly, why do I get this sneaky feeling that it is precisely what the Election Commission is aspiring for: poor participation by the Bhutanese citizens!

Shining Example Of Democracy At Work

Bhutan probably qualifies as one of the world's youngest democracies - we began our democratic journey only in the year 2008. This means that since the democratic form of governance was first conceived in 508 BC in ancient Athens, we have more that 2,500 years of past successes and failures of the democratic cultures, systems and processes, to learn from.

It is a shame that there is no indication that we have learnt even a day’s lesson - in our past fifteen years of dabbling in what we gratefully accept is a ---- Gift from the Golden Throne.

For proof, read the following shamefully undemocratic announcement by the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) - supposedly the sole custodian of all that is fair and good in a democracy.

No political parties or candidates may make any pledges unless they have been approved and sanctioned by the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB).

According to the above announcement, the Election Commission has elected themselves as both judge and jury - they made it clear that THEY WILL DECIDE - not the political parties - nor the electorate - what is good and acceptable. The Election Commission, in other words, is making it clear that they have the mandate to decide what is a good manifesto and what is not. In other words, the Election Commission has the moral authority to govern, not regulate, the political parties and the electorate.

In other words, they are saying that the electorate and the political parties have no independent role in the country's democratic process.

If this is how democracy is to function in this country, why don’t the Election Commission draw up five sets of manifestos and hand them each to the five political parties to pronounce to their electorate? Where is the need for the leaders of the political parties to break their heads to design, what they believe, are the most progressive and useful manifestos?

It is so terribly disheartening that an authority charged with the responsibility of assuring a vibrant democracy in the country should choose to behave in this most undemocratic manner. And from all signs, we are going to have to allow it.

There was a time when I used to take great pride in being known as one belonging to a country called BHUTAN. Years back, when I was invited to Hong Kong to attend a marriage party, I wore my Gho to the event - to show to the gathering of the very best from around the world that I am Bhutanese, and proud to be one. I was thrilled to be the center of attention in that star spangled gathering.

At the age of 28 I was elected to be the President of the Working Group of 19 nations during a UN/ILO international gathering. There was a sense of achievement, a sense of pride of belonging. Today I stutter and stammer - when I have no choice but admit that I am from …. Oh that country Bhutan!

We need to retrieve ourselves from this headlong plunge into the abyss of doom where we are surely headed. Each of us who claim to be Bhutanese must consider it a pride, a duty - to strive to contribute a verse, even a single word - towards achieving that end.

Remember, NO ONE WILL DO IT for us.

Democracy Out Of A Carton Box?

A friend in the US sent me a link to a reputable website on which the following photo of one of our voting compartments of the recently concluded 2018 General election is depicted. The caption underneath the photo reads as follows:

A woman votes in a polling station in Bhutan's capital Thimphu for the parliamentary elections in October 2018, when the small Himalayan kingdom held its third election since the elimination of absolute monarchy.

I looked at the image with a sinking feeling. I was horrified! Can’t we do a better job of building a more respectable looking voting compartment? If this is the state of affairs in the capital city, what must be happening in the rural areas? Why are we wasting time fooling around with democracy, if this is the level of our seriousness about it?

Democracy out of a taped up carton box?

Surely we are better than this? When are we going to put our minds to what we are doing? This is truly pathetic.

General Round of Bhutan’s 3rd Parliamentary Elections

The General round of Bhutan’s 3rd Parliamentary elections is scheduled to be held on October 18, 2018. On that day a section of the Bhutanese people will choose the party that will form the government, for the next 5 years.

This election is interesting on many fronts.

1. PDP - Many had believed that PDP would emerge the winner in the Primary rounds and even go on to win the elections to form the government for a second term. They were unceremoniously shunted out. Even more surprising, they fared poorly in the postal ballots, which caught many by surprise.

2. DNT - considered a rank outsider - dethroned the strident and swaggering PDP - to emerge the winner of the Primary round. The public perception was that they would trail a doubtful second, behind PDP.

3. DPT - to every body’s utter consternation - the DPT emerged victorious in the Primary rounds. In fact, in terms of number of constituencies won, they are the undisputed victors. Most had believed that DPT would soon cease to exist as a political entity. But just as the proverbial Phoenix rose from the ashes, so did DPT soar, from despondency to dominion - bringing home the truth about the unpredictable nature of politics.

4. BKP - seen by many as a party that would attempt to do the most right. Their promise to fight corruption should have gotten them truckloads of votes. Sadly it appears that fighting corruption is not on the priority list of the Bhutanese people - how poorly the party fared is proof of that.

The results of the Primary round are out in the open and there is no altering it. Now what is to be seen is how we will vote during the crucial General round, which is due on the 18th of October, 2018.

Will the Sharchops’ continue to remain doggedly unwavering in their loyalty towards their party of choice - the underdog DPT? Or will they capitulate to another round of lyrical renditions from the likes of Dasho Sonam Kinga and Ex-Police Chief Kipchu Tshering? While I personally remain unconvinced that their negativity made any difference at all, is it possible that the DNT President’s promise of a gaggle of Ministerial berths for the Eastern Dzongkhags would manage to wean away voters from the DPT? Will they change their minds at this critical juncture? We will have to wait and see. The Sharchop factor is key - and they make me jittery.

I am in no doubt that the Central votes will yet again go the DPT way. The Bumtaps are a willy lot, as are the Koortoeps. For the Bumtaps, it is CARPE DIEM! They are just too smart to let slip away an opportunity to elect a Prime Minister from their Dzongkhag. It is just too alluring.

Zhemgang has been a mixed bag for the DPT. While Lyonpo Dorji Wangdi is unshakable in his Panbang constituency, the Bardo-Trong constituency has been indecisive in the past. They voted for DPT in 2008 but against it in 2013. Encouragingly for the DPT, Zhemgang voted for them 100% during this Primary round. It is to be seen how they will vote during the General round.

I am not going to hazard a guess as to how the Western and Southern voters will behave. Voters in these two regions will have you believe that they are knowledgeable and learned in the selections they make. That they are inherently more astute than others, and that they know a thing or two about making informed choices. For all that, they make the most erroneous choices.

But I do believe that there might be an element of surprise awaiting the General round of elections.

My Take

In the General round it appears that the swing votes will be those from the West and the South. People are more or less convinced that DPT will sweep both Eastern and Central regions. I tend to agree - going by the primary results. Of the total 21 constituencies in these two regions, DPT won 20 constituencies. If this trend continues, DPT needs only 4 constituencies from the Southern and Western constituencies, to win the elections.

In addition to the total of 20 constituencies in the Eastern and Central regions, DPT also won one each from Paro and Samtsi - taking the total constituencies won to 22. This means that the DPT needs only 2 additional constituencies, to emerge the winner of the 2018 elections. Is this doable?

I think it is doable. Why? The following is my reasoning:

I think people of Haa and Wangdue are likely to wake up to the reality that they may be the only two Dzongkhags from where there will be no Ministers who will form the new cabinet. Now this is a big deal - people of Haa and Wangdue will realize that should the DPT win - and in all likelihood they will win - their Dzongkhags will have no Ministers to root for them. People of Haa and Wangdue are very competitive in nature and the fear that they might get left behind is bound to play on their minds. Is it likely that this very real eventuality might make them catapult in the last minute, and vote for DPT! Quite likely ---- and then again one never knows.

Finally, what intrigues me most is how the Indian government will behave, should the DPT win the elections. It is said that they believe that DPT is anti-India and pro-China. Regardless of how they perceive the party, the reality is that they will have to live with the party - for the next five years, should they come to power. Now, India can either decide that the meaningful way forward would be to reconcile their ways and show that India is behind Bhutan - regardless of the party in power, or they can continue to give DPT a hard time and edge them towards China. India will have to make that choice. But certainly from my point of view - should the DPT come to power, India would be presented this God sent opportunity to work at removing some serious misconceptions and put India-Bhutan relations on a more solid footing. It is becoming clear that people of Bhutan have increasingly become edgy about the deteriorating relationship between two long time friends. How India will treat DPT, if they do come to power, will demonstrate to the people of Bhutan whether they have Bhutan’s interests at heart, in addition to their own, which are no less legitimate.

Or, India can yet again repeat the kerosene and cooking gas withdrawal stunt.

The Uncommon Common Forums

The Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB) is a regulatory authority - a facilitator charged with the responsibility to promote a healthy democratic culture, ensure fair play and safeguard ideals that would encourage enthusiastic participation in the democratic evolution, by the people of Bhutan for whom democracy is still a new concept. But I fear that the ECB - the torchbearer of the democratic process - has not been entirely democratic. On the contrary, I believe that they have violated the most fundamental of rights guaranteed by Article 7:2 of the Constitution of Bhutan.

The Common Forum dissertation is a great idea. Unfortunately, denying the candidates the freedom and the right to express themselves in a language of their choice has defeated the whole purpose behind the Common Forums. There is nothing democratic about the ECB requiring the candidates to express themselves in a language that they cannot speak. In fact I think this is infringement on the most basic of a human’s right.

The Kuensel’s article reproduced below clearly indicates that Common Forums are relevant. In fact one of the voters interviewed by the Kuensel’s reporter says that he did not attend the Common Forums of the past two elections because he did not understand what was being said. Another voter states that Common Forums in a language that they understand makes all the deference in making an informed choice.

One friend and reader of my Blog (https://yesheydorji.blogspot.com/2018/08/hung-yegcha-gesa-jawai-lablo-shi-kae.html) called me to say that she did not agree with me that the language of the Common Forms should be in any other language, other than Dzongkha. I asked her why – her answer was: Dzongkha is our national language. So I asked her: by that you mean Tsangla, Khengkha, Bumtap, Lhotsamkha, Brokkat ---- are not our national languages? I explained to her that any language identified with a bona fide Bhutanese citizen, and spoken within the boundaries of the territory of Bhutan – must and should qualify as a national language.

What is the logic in requiring candidates to speak in a language that they cannot speak? How is it meaningful to require voters to listen to a language that they cannot understand?

Other than to inhibit the democratic process, what meaningful purpose does it serve?

But I am encouraged - the ECB has now allowed the speaking of other languages - other than Dzongkha - during the informal Common Forums, whatever that means. I suppose, like our democracy, the ECB's evolutionary process is still incomplete. 😜

Bhutan's 3rd Parliamentary Elections: One Down, One More To Go

So, the Primary round of our 3rd Parliamentary elections is behind us and we now look forward to the General round.

The result did not disappoint - it was unavoidable that Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT) would emerge victorious. I foresaw too that People’s Democratic Party (PDP) would not make it to the General round - not because they performed badly during their time in the government, or that their candidates were any less qualified than other party's - but because it became clear to me that Druk Nyamrup Tshogpa (DNT) was making serious inroads into the PDP’s traditional support base - Southern and Western Dzongkhags (Districts). Had voting been delayed by few more weeks, PDP’s harvest of the votes would have been even lower - DNT’s weaning ways would have caused even greater loss for the party.

PDP made a fundamental mistake in believing that DPT was their nemesis. In doing so they failed to take notice of the joker in the pack - a willie and masterful upstart that knew exactly where to hurt and maim. DNT went about methodically weaning away voters from the PDP stronghold, in the Dzongkhags where they were sure they had a standing chance. This was strategic thinking on the part of DNT - they focused on first wining the battle to get to the war. They damn well knew that trying to poke a dent in the DPT stronghold (Eastern & Central Dzongkhags) would be futile and ill-timed, atleast at this juncture. Very smart!

My reading was that DPT would enter the General round. I was right - they emerged the winner of the Primary round - in terms of  total number of constituencies won (in terms of total number of votes, DNT is the winner - they got 2,702 more votes than DPT). Some believe that Sonam Kinga’s facebook post (since I am not in the facebook, I am not aware of the full context of the post) had the opposite of the intended effect, that it generated a lot of sympathy votes for the DPT. I totally disagree - his post was inconsequential. Ten negative posts from him would not have altered the result one bit - not even God.

There is only one factor behind DPT’s win - the Sharchop (Easterners) factor!

I use to jokingly tell my Sharchop friends that if I stood on a mound and chuck a stone into any gathering, it would unfailingly hit a Sharchop. I now look at the Sharchops through a different lens - to be jestful of their numerosity is to invite peril. Obeisance to the mighty Sharchops!

Before the start of the campaigns some told me that the people of the Eastern Dzongkhags have all vowed to vote for the DPT - regardless of who represented the party. Other than one solitary constituency - Lhuentse’s Gangzur-Menjey - every Sharchop constituency voted for the DPT - all 16 constituencies, out of a total of 17!

Don’t mess with the Sharchops - they can make or break you, atleast in the political arena.

Scary!

I wish luck to both the winning parties - during the upcoming General round. But in truth, as so wisely said by the President of DNT Dr. Lotay Tshering during his interview to the BBS TV, too much sound and fury is unnecessary, to elect a gaggle of foot soldiers and drummers and trumpeters. As long as the country remains to be guided and steered in the right direction by our able Field Marshal and the General, their winning ways will continue to assure victory at every bend and every corner. All that the Bhutanese people need remind themselves at all times is this: Winning or losing an election is not the end of the world. What is important to understand is that we are fortunate to have been given the right and the freedom to exercise a choice. Should a larger number of people choose to defer with your choice, it is not an affront to you. This time around, their choice happens to find greater acceptance over yours. It is not in opposition to yours - it is different to yours. Being different is not wrong - being unaccepting of a differing view, is.

Clueless About What We Are Talking and Doing

A European reader of my Blog writes to me as follows :

“…… Clining to one’s temple is not a safeguard but a fear of the future. The slogan His Majesty the King exposed to Sudents on August 17 at the National Graduate Orientation Programme, giving them his thought « Evolve, Adapt , Upgrade » cannot be understood by the whole people. Let us hope that He will be able to give some precise headings for the « little people » after the election and of the future elected P.M. I have a plenty confidence of His visionary feel.”

The man is clearly worried by the way our elections are going and by what is being put out by our politicians.

I am worried too. How did we get this way? At what point in time did we shed our sense for reasoned thinking?

Another reader from Asia – an academician – writes:

“………. More generally, I am disappointed that politicians have declined - for their own reasons - to address your critique of the hydel mess.

Otherwise, on the political front, I am depressed that Central issues are not being addressed in a strategic vision.”

That says it all!

Our politicians are talking of cutting taxes – obviously they are clueless about the merits of broadening the tax base and increasing tax collection.

They are splendid in their brazen intention to help the civil service remain corrupt – in fact, even heighten it through the promise of increased quota allocation. That is in stark contrast to our collective endeavor to fight corruption. Who is fooling who?

Late in life I am beginning to face the reality of the scrambled Bhutanese psyche, more precisely – thoughtlessness.

Few weeks back during one of our Club meetings, a discussion was initiated as to how much to pay our Members – when they are out in the field, on Club business. Whole lot of Members began putting out numbers, justifying sums, working out averages, cost of lodgings, cost of meals, breakfast, conveyance etc. to arrive at a sum that, in their opinion, should be justly claimed by a Member as TA/DA entitlement.

In the ensuing discussions, one central point was completely missed - that Rotary work is voluntary - there is no such thing as an entitlement. Entitlement is the very antithesis to the Rotary doctrine.

I tried to make the point that a Rotarian cannot claim entitlement – because that is not in the spirit of voluntarism. It is not in the spirit of Rotary to claim an entitlement for doing a humanitarian voluntary service. I vehemently opposed the idea of fixing an entitlement on the grounds that doing so would violate the Rotary dictum. Instead I suggested that a Member could claim actual cost spent behind performing a task on behalf of the Club. My logic is simple – as a person belonging to a voluntary organization, one is expected to volunteer ones time and skills, FREE. No entitlements can be claimed. However, a Member is not required to suffer financial loss in the pursuit of Rotary objectives, involuntarily. Thus he or she should be reimbursed in full, all the sums he or she spent, if he or she so wishes.

My logic simply did not gel with those of my colleagues. It was all Greek to them. Thus, I gave up arguing because it was clear that there was no clarity in their thoughts. If 7 years of Membership has not taught them the finer nuances of being a Rotarian, my frothing in the mouth arguing a point for an hour wasn’t going to yield any results.

It is like our government issuing a person a license to start an enterprise of profit - and then accusing the person of making profits!  That is the level of our confusion.

Hung Yegcha Gesa? Jawai Lablo Shi? Keh Bhandai Cha?

Three elections later, we are still stuck at the point where we began – in the puddle of confusion.

The on-going Common Forum debates on the BBS TV is a shameful example of how unreasoned we are as a society - of moronic proportions. Where is the sense is requiring a candidate to speak in a language in which he is so poorly skilled? And what meaning can there be for a bunch of audience having to tolerate a blabbering politician who is unable to coherently pass on the message that he is apparently struggling to pass on?

What is the point of asking a mathematician to speak to a gathering entirely comprised of geologists?

Candidates should be allowed to speak in a language in which they are proficient – so that they are able to pass on whatever message they want to pass on to prospective supporters. And the supporters – if they are one – why should they be made to tolerate a blabbering session about which they are clueless?

I think the Dashos at the Election Commission or whoever, must start to understand that Common Forums and Election Campaigns are occasions when candidates have the opportunity to get out their messages to the voters. This can hardly be done by requiring them to speak in a language that they cannot speak - and to a gathering for whom Dzongkha is Greek.

The voters must be given an opportunity to make an informed choice. This means they have to understand what is being said by the candidates - the candidates must be judged on the basis of what they say and promise. How can an educated judgement be made when the voters are clueless as to what the candidates are saying?

Our election rules are full of absurdities. Take the case of the civil servants requiring to remain “apolitical”. How is that possible? The moment a person casts his vote, he can no longer claim to be apolitical. The only way to ensure that a civil servant remains apolitical is to disallow him/her from voting.

Explanation: Since I have a large following outside the country, I would like to explain that the title of the post is an outcry of exasperation expressed in Sharchopkha (language of the Eastern) followed by Khengkha (language of the Central) and lastly in Lhotshamkha (language of the Southern) Bhutan. Expressed in English, it means: "What the hell is the man talking about?"

Amendment of Electoral Laws

According to a report in the Kuensel of September 19, the National Council has initiated a discussion on the electoral corruptions that were reported during our last General Elections. I am happy that some of the Members of the Upper House have accepted that there were incidences of corruption and malpractices during our last General Elections. I offer those Honorable Members my heartiest congratulations. The first step to correcting flaws in the rules is to accept that they exist. There is no merit in crying over what could have been - a progressive society always looks forward and the way forward is to learn from past mistakes and ensure that they are not repeated.

There are a huge lot of problems with our electoral laws. They need to be amended. Having already gone through two General Elections, we are now fairly aware where the faults lie. I am not blaming the laws - I accept that they were made with the very best intensions but the fact that they were inadequate and failed the people miserably - only proves my point that I have always made:

How is it possible for a nation of people steeped in a monarchic culture - to frame laws and define processes - as to how democracy must function?

I wish I had the time to go into details of what needs changed - if I had I would have been happy to offer suggestions, as a concerned citizen. But for now, I do have to offer three suggestions:

1.  EVMs
2.  Language of Campaign
3.  Powers of the ECB as a regulatory authority

1.  EVMs
At the top of the list of what is wrong in our electoral process is - the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). Our last election has proven that they stifle the voice of the people. EVMs are electronic devices that are slaves to the dictates of their masters – the programmers.

We should do away with them IMMEDIATELY.

Because of their proven vulnerability, not many countries around the world use them during elections - or have abandoned their use. They can be programmed to declare results that are pre-determined. Thousands of man-hours have been spent studying the vulnerability of the EVMs and one report among the thousands undertaken, reads as follows (I am referring to Indian experience since our EVMs are manufactured in India):

……. In recent years there have been numerous allegations and press reports of election irregularities involving Indian EVMs. It is difficult to assess the credibility of these charges, since there has apparently never been a prosecution related to EVM fraud, and there has never been a post-election audit to attempt to understand the causes. Nevertheless, they paint a troubling picture of election security in India.
…… Especially troubling are reports that when the voter pressed a button for one candidate, a light would flash for another, which could be explained by a simple attack on the EVM cable. Rao also relates reports from prominent politicians that engineers approached them in 2009 offering to fix elections through this method.
….. Despite elaborate safeguards, India’s EVMs are vulnerable to serious attacks. Dishonest insiders or other criminals with physical access to the machines at any time before ballots are counted can insert malicious hardware that can steal votes for the lifetime of the machines. Attackers with physical access between voting and counting can arbitrarily change vote totals and can learn which candidate each voter selected.
….. It is highly doubtful that these problems could be remedied by simple upgrades to the existing EVMs or election procedures. Merely making the attacks we have demonstrated more difficult will not fix the fundamental problem: India’s EVMs do not provide transparency, so voters and election officials have no reason for confidence that the machines are behaving honestly.
India should carefully reconsider how to achieve a secure and transparent voting system that is suitable to its national values and requirements. One option that has been adopted in other countries is to use a voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT), which combines an electronic record stored in a DRE with a paper vote record that can be audited by hand. Another option is precinct-count optical scan (PCOS) voting, where voters fill out paper ballots that are scanned by a voting machine at the polling station before being placed in a ballot box. Attacking either of these systems would require tampering with both the paper records and the electronic records, provided that routine audits are performed to make sure these redundant sets of records agree.
.…. Despite all of their known weaknesses, simple paper ballots provide a high degree of transparency, so fraud that does occur will be more likely to be detected.
Using EVMs in India may have seemed like a good idea when the machines were introduced in the 1980s, but science’s understanding of electronic voting security - and of attacks against it - has progressed dramatically since then, and other technologically advanced countries have adopted and then abandoned EVM-style voting.

2.  Language of Campaign
I have said this in one of my earlier articles - the party candidates must be allowed to campaign in a language in which he/she is skilled. To force the candidates to speak in Dzongkha defeats the very purpose for which election campaigns are conducted. Not many Bhutanese understand Dzongkha and not many speak it. Regional languages are as important as Dzongkha.

3.  Powers of the ECB
The ECB is too autocratic. Their powers need to be moderated. It has also become evident that there must be a democratic process to decision making. What we have seen so far is that the ECB is the absolute and final authority and they alone can decide - without recourse to an alternate view or dispute settlement.

In my view the weakest link in our democratic process has been the ECB and the absolute powers they have been empowered with.

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.