The permitted parties fought less; in fact, they had nothing to prove superior over the other party. The manifestoes emerged as two copies prepared by a single drafter. Voters had the opulence of two sources for the same content. Both the manifestoes came from the Gross National Happiness Commission; institutionalize to praise the former monarch in a royal way. As a body has two eyes, two hands, two legs and one mouth, the royal decreed democracy had two parties, with different faces, leaders and supporters but one voice: Gross National Happiness (GNH). The winning or loosing depended not much on the political food of thought but on the buttered lips of candidates and their supporters.

In the name of education for democracy, people were taught to press buttons of voting machines and election speeches focused on the characteristics of a bad party. Election promises read out were from the draft of the up-coming five-year development plan, prepared by the cabinet in unison before the virtual split.

The  first radical reform by the reincarnated government took in its infancy of democratic  era was the hike in salary of the statesmen, with a big expectation that their action would be applauded, praised and sang for months and years, as it used be in  their earlier epoch.  The story ended the next day of the implementation, apparently signifying that the change has come.

A year of democratic era saw a rapid increase in the number of people seeking judicial interference. The Anti Corruption Commission (ACC), a bespoke body to crucify the defaulters and corrupts, reached beyond capital to districts and development centers, mines and construction sites. The ACC’s role is not just bringing defaulters to the book of justice but also underscoring the judicial and legal loopholes that have existed for abuse.

On one hand, the problem of unemployment has soared up to an indestructible height. No large-scale enterprises are in plan to accommodate the fresh graduates and school dropouts. On the other hand, there is such a dearth of skilled human resources particularly of doctors, nurses, teachers and accountants that the government has no luxury of choice, either to hire workers from abroad or to close its eyes. This is the direct consequences of the erstwhile government’s faulty education system and its desperate attempt to hide the then existing problems.

Freedom of expression has expanded, at least in the parliament, however, since most of the elected parliamentarians are yet to free themselves from the trauma of the suppressed bureaucratic background they hail from, accustomed to stoop before senior- make the junior bow, are unable to utilize even the accessible freedom.

There is a sharp improvement in the quantity and the content of the print and online media. Unlike in the past when the reporter had to get news and consent from the related department heads, secretaries and ministers, the democratic era journalists have audaciously gone to villages, deprived areas, uncovered the truth and published the facts. As expected the Bhutanese media has taken a leap forward and are successful as the tower lights of democracy.  Nevertheless, they are not free from threat and insecurity.

The government has availed timely balm of compensation to the victims of natural calamities. However, there is little doubt that any other party in the government would have done no less. While the government has no material proof to boast of achievement of pertinently observed development, it has been showing its presence. The runway for domestic air services are materialized, wires for electricity supply are extended to many villages, at least dozen or one sixth of the schools closed in the southern districts were resurrected and the issue of security clearance and no objection certificate (NOC) created turmoil in the parliament but sadly had a narrow escape. The government has the mandate for four more years to either bring in airplanes on the runway, supply current through the wires, let children become students in the deprived areas, and revoke the tribulations of NOC, or doze off the period and invite a bull-dozer in the next term.

The most soothing music in the ears of the cronies of the erstwhile autocrats is to hear the news of Bhutanese in exile resettling in the developed nations. For the time being, the problem seems closer to an end. However, will the government continue happy go lucky hiding the crimes against humanity of the erstwhile government forever, remains a question to the younger generation. The government to sanctify itself must form a commission to look into the problem termed by the former monarch as ‘ngolop uprising in the south’ bring the defaulters to the book of justice and free the innocent from the prolonged punishments. However, as most of the defaulters own supreme command in the government, it is not going to materialize at least in this term. Although the DPT government characterizes old stocks in new coop, there ought to be no dearth of revolutionary vision to meet the transition and take better advantage, as it houses and commands the best brains of the nation.

To read the report in detail, please visit our report section.

Despite having won 45 out of 47 National Assembly seats, the leaders during a gathering in capital April 11 claimed the party does not have adequate fund to run office in districts smoothly. 

The membership increase is also not as expected though party had landslide victory in elections. The local party leaders called for additional funds to run their offices, even asking the Member of Parliament to support run party offices in their districts.

Injecting democratic values 

The National Assembly members

The deficiency of political consciousness – not alone in people but in political leadership – has begun to hunt the new born democracy in Bhutan. Even today, the hardcore nationalists claim the obvious object of King Jigme Singye was to transform nation into a parliamentary democracy peacefully. It is unclear, had there been any real interest to do so and had there been any effort to inject the ideas, values and procedures of democratic government in at least the probable political tycoons.

The nation has an apolitical upper house, a rarely practiced phenomenon in parliamentary democracies. Since the upper house National Assembly has greater attachment to sentiments of the King, for it has five nominees from him, the power tussle between the two houses has already surfaced. It was the first tussle of the first session of the first parliament of democratic Bhutan.

The first DPT government unveiled its incomplete (since the budget was later amended) financial bill at the lower house National Assembly after which the NC claimed it has the legal authority to have say in the bill. Being apolitical, the government sensed some intrigues from NC that could alter the provisions and programs in the budget thus forcing it to change some of the economic agendas and strategies. Resultantly, two houses quarreled on whether they have absolute authority to deal with the fiscal budget. 

Who should pass financial bill?

Budget is the financial bill and according to the constitution, both the houses have equal rights to debate and approve it, NC said. In response the DPT-lodged NA without listening, announced it endorsed the budget. In reality, the joint sitting of both the house remained divided on endorsing it and today, the budget is implemented without approval from the Upper House. The motive to subdue the voices from upper house was the fear the DPT government had that proposed projects for state support to the political parties and constituency development grants to Members of Parliament (MPs) could be chocked out. It was because the NC had termed these provisions as unconstitutional. The constitution restricts any state funding to political parties and constituency development budget to the politicians. Almost the year has gone by – only four months left to end the fiscal year– but still the two houses remain divided whether the budget should be reviewed and endorsed from the upper house as well. 

The cause is the result of rulers who isolated people from reading democratic practices from across the globe in the past. Now, the political leadership finds no alternatives to inviting Indian lawyer for interpreting Bhutanese constitution. In a sense, an expert hired for drafting the constitution certainly has advantage in interpreting the constitution but in other, his presence will have a prolonged impact on Bhutan’s constitutional practices indirectly authorizing the Indian experts as the final interpreter of our law. This is not just to demean our expertise but to undermine the role of Bhutanese judiciary on whose head lies the final authority to interpret the constitution.  

Legitimacy and the expertise of Chief Justice Sonam Tobgay have come to the foray with this initiative. The defenders may say it is the Supreme Court, yet to be constituted as provisioned by the constitution, that has the authority to interpret the constitution but it does not subscribe the fact that High Court currently serving as the ad hoc Supreme Court has no legality or authority at all on this matter. In addition, Sonam Tobgay was named the chairperson by King Jigme Singye to draft the constitution, which subtly suit to credit Tobgay for moving country into the constitutional monarchy. He could have helped what drafting team had discussed the issued during the constitution making process.  

The ghost continued to hunt the second session of the parliament. The NC members were adamant to dig up their right to have say in the budget procedures. The DPT dominated NA could resist no more pressure. Finally, the easy exit for the party is to have some experts speak about the issue. Then, NA eventually thought inviting India’s top advocate K. K. Venugopal to use his expertise to interpret what Bhutanese constitution says. 

The interpreter of the Bhutanese constitution

What NA did came to the floor very late. Outsiders knew only recently why the debate on budget had abruptly closed without a compromising conclusion from the two houses. According to Venugopal, provisions of Article 13 and 14 of the Bhutanese Constitution follow the procedures for financial legislation similar to that of India – the country which endorses budget only from lower house.

According to the interpretation of Bhutanese constitution by this lawyer, the budget is first discussed in both the Houses and only the Lower House has the authority to vote on the categories of expenditures or the appropriation bill under the budget.

The assertion of NC has weight on one aspect that it has the authority to vote on the budget since it is a bill but it has also demanded that it should be sent to the King for endorsement, the practice set only in few democracies. 

Constitutional provision 

The constitution of Bhutan does not adequately explain whether budget is regarded as bill but in general practice, financial bill is used to define budget. But because this is yearly cycle, Financial Bill is different than other bills, which become permanent laws of the country upon endorsement. The constitution says in case of the urgent bills and budget, they shall be passed in the same session of the parliament. To note this side of the constitution, when it comes to the procedures laid for passing bills, budget is deemed to be a bill – the Financial Bill and has to go to King for assent upon approval from both the houses. 

However, Kottayan Katankot Venugopal said the word ‘bills’ is not qualified by the word ‘Budget,’ as a result of which the question of placing the Budget for the assent for the King will not arise. And this has been accepted by Bhutanese lawyers, faithfully. 

The concern is not about how budget is passed in parliament but is the measure taken for interpretation of the constitution. It is not necessary that Bhutan has to follow what India has. And this does not mean Bhutan should not follow what India has.

Interpretation of constitution has larger impact on national sovereignty. Had the National Assembly asked Indian lawyer about budget procedures in his country, issue would not have come to be debatable. Had these MPs who visited Denmark to learn parliamentary practices inquired about budget endorsement process in Europe, Bhutan could have set its own procedures for this. It is unseen factor whether they had ignored the issue or feared of lessening Indian influences in national politics. Denmark where MPs visited to take tuition on democracy and parliamentary practices, the single chamber of the people’s representatives passes the Financial Bill and is sent to Queen, the head of the state, for assent before the budget is implemented by the ruling party.

The National Assembly has the authority, by virtue and by constitutional provisions, to amend constitutions to suit the need and time. Debating on procedure and setting a constitutional provision would have been a better solution for the constraint than inviting a foreign lawyer for its interpretation. The Indian version of interpretation of our constitution has ceded sovereign authority and supremacy of interpretation of our constitution to India.  

Democracy has been established and people’s representatives have been adorned with authority to formulate laws, protect national sovereignty. It is their duty to determine how budget must be passed in the parliament, even if that needed amendment in constitution defining budget – whether it is to be regarded as bill or different.