A Punakha student seeks clarification on the Constitution

During discussions on Article 2:12, the Institution of the Monarchy, one mangmi proposed that the parents of the Queens of the Bhutanese Monarchs should be included as members of the royal family.

His Majesty the King reminded the representatives of Punakha that the Constitution of Bhutan was being adopted for the long-term benefit of the country and the people. It was important, therefore, that every thought shared, every idea contributed, and every decision taken was done in the interest of the country. His Majesty said that the royal family had been clearly defined in the draft Constitution, based on traditional wisdom and universal norms. There was no need to increase the size of the royal family because an extended royal family would not be of benefit to the country.

Repeating a submission made in three other dzongkhags one gup proposed that Bhutan should institutionalise the position of the Chhoetse Penlop by including it in the Constitution since it was a time-honoured tradition that the Crown Prince assumed this position before being enthroned.

His Majesty said that the heirs to the Throne had been installed as the Chhoetse Penlop, also known as the Trongsa Penlop, in the past because it was good tendryil - an auspicious tradition - for the institution of Monarchy and for the country. The people valued it today because it had been observed since the time of Gongsar Ugyen Wangchuck. That was why His Royal Highness the Crown Prince, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, who would soon be King, had been installed as the Chhoetse Penlop.

His Majesty pointed out, however, that it could be more than 30 years before the next Chhoetse Penlop would be installed. By then the process of democratisation would have matured and the psyche of the people would have changed with the political reform. There might be no advantages to the royal heir or to the system by installing him as the Chhoetse Penlop, or Trongsa Penlop, a title that was, by implication, confined to one dzongkhag.

Therefore it would be more relevant if the heir to the Throne of Bhutan was called the Crown Prince because he would be a Crown Prince for the entire nation.

Several members of the public proposed that, if the Druk Gyalpo had to step down at the age of 65 years, the age limit for constitutional posts and drangpons of the Supreme Court should be brought down to 60 years.

In response His Majesty said it was important that the holders of Constitutional offices should be experienced, qualified, and competent people with no political affiliations. The posts were, therefore, kept open to government officials and capable people among the public, including those who had retired from the civil service. If the age limit was not maintained at 65 years there would be no chance of selecting good candidates from the broader pool of civil society at large.

His Majesty reminded the meeting that there was the possibility of people joining the politics on their retirement, in which case they would not be eligible for Constitutional posts. The tenure of Constitutional posts was also limited to five-year terms and they were not eligible for re-appointment. The holders of Constitutional posts would have to resign on the completion of their term of five years or when they reached the age of 65 years, whichever came earlier. In the case of the Supreme Court drangpons the term was 10 years, also with the ceiling of 65 years.

One gup pointed out that the sub-section (q) of Section 19 under Article 2 stated that “the Druk Gyalpo shall, by warrant under his hand and seal, appoint dzongdas on the recommendation of the prime minister who shall obtain nominations from RCSC”. He said that the drangpons should be given the same privilege.

The Chief Justice, Lyonpo Sonam Tobgye, said that the three arms of the government should not interfere with each other. He said that the appointment of drangpons and the appointment of the dzongdas were two completely different processes. The appointment of dzongdas was a Constitutional and political process whereas the appointment of the drangpons was a judicial process to ensure the principle of separation of power, secure independence, and to ensure prompt action by the Chief Justice to remedy the situation.

A village elder asked for a clarification of the term, “language” in Section 1 of Article 4 on Culture. Did it refer to just the national language or did it include regional dialects and languages?

The Chief Justice explained that the national language, Dzongkha, had been clearly identified in Article 1, Section 8, so it would never be undermined. Language in this section referred to Bhutan’s unique culture that was enriched by four main languages and at least 19 dialects. It was important in a plural society that this rich heritage was preserved.

One student said that the “freedom of religion” might encourage the spread of other religions and dilute the Buddhist tradition which was Bhutan’s spiritual heritage.

The Chief Justice explained that the Druk Gyalpo was the protector of all religions and that, in a democracy there should be no discrimination against any religion. Freedom of religion was a fundamental right of the people.

Clarifying a submission on elections His Majesty the King explained to the meeting that an Election Act was already drafted and would be enacted by the National Assembly. His Majesty also announced that most of the Constitutional posts like the Election Commission would be appointed in December.

One gup expressed his concern that, with the change from one vote per family to the adult franchise system families could be split up if they had different political leanings. It might also cause inter-party distrust and tensions when members of one family belonged to different political parties.

The Chief Justice clarified that, in a democratic society, members of the same family had the right to decide their own party affiliations. Political parties should be responsible for the intricacies of inter-party rivalry.

Also responding to a query on the basis of political parties the Chief Justice said that it was important for political parties to be broad-based. Political parties should not be based on regionalism, gender, ethnicity, languages and dialects, social origins, and religious belief. It was important for the parties to include cross-national membership from all the regions to demonstrate national cohesion, to avoid all opportunities of separatist and secessionist intentions, and be committed to national unity and stability. Groups of larger dzongkhags should not dominate political parties.

On Article 21 one Punakha representative said that the Druk Gyalpo should continue to be the final appellate authority to whom the Bhutanese people could continue to appeal for justice because even the drangpons of the Supreme Court would be subjected to temptations like nepotism and corruption.

The Chief Justice said that the present system of appealing to His Majesty the King had truly served the interests of the Bhutanese people. The Druk Gyalpo, as head of state, would be the protector and upholder of the Constitution. Therefore, by Constitutional principle, the Supreme Court should be the final authority on its interpretation. He added that, if any Bhutanese citizen was denied justice Article 2, Section 16, sub-section (c) empowered the Druk Gyalpo, in the exercise of his royal prerogatives to grant amnesty, pardon, or reduction of sentences.

The Chief Justice pointed out to the meeting that Article 32, National Referendum, of the Bhutanese Constitution was a unique provision that His Majesty had personally commanded, encompassing the values of both direct and representative democracy. He said that His Majesty the King, against the advice of the drafting committee, had commanded that the Constitution should also include the provision for the people to initiate a national referendum against the King. This, he added, was the magnitude of the authority and responsibility vested in the Bhutanese people.

Concluding the meeting in Punakha His Majesty emphasised the responsibility of the people in ensuring that the Constitution of Bhutan remained relevant for the future interest of the country and people. His Majesty pointed out that the people were empowered to amend the Constitution, thereby shaping the destiny of the country, through the processes of initiative democracy, representative democracy, and direct democracy.

His Majesty explained that the Constitution could be amended if the amendment was passed by 75 percent vote in parliament and, more important, by a national referendum called by the people. The people had the power to annul the changes made by parliament. The national referendum would be called in all 20 dzongkhags and, if more than 50 percent agreed on the amendment, the Constitution would be amended, including the Article on the Institution of Monarchy.

His Majesty the King pointed out that, by 2008, the Constitution would be adopted, thereby vesting in the people the power and responsibility to elect a capable government. A parliamentary democracy was a people’s government and the success or failure of the system would be determined by the ability of the Bhutanese people to elect a government that would serve the interests of the country.

His Majesty expressed his hope and prayer that, in the historical tradition established by the founding father of the Bhutanese nation, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan would fulfill the hopes and aspirations of the people of Palden Drukpa for all time to come.

Talking to Kuensel, the people of Punakha echoed the apprehensions and hopes of a population on the eve of a change they are yet to fathom.

Wangdi of Kabji geog said that, with His Majesty the King himself explaining the benefits of the Constitution, there was no reason for doubt. But, like many of his compatriots, he felt that 2008 was disturbingly close. “Most of us are illiterate today and can’t even understand the GYT and DYT Chathrims,” he said. “It would be best if the adoption of the Constitution is delayed until the present generation of students grow up and have a better understanding of the Constitution to ensure a smooth functioning of the new democratic system.”

Soena Dem of Dzome gewog said that the new government would be like sailing in a small boat on a big ocean. “If the sailor is good we will sail on,” she said, “but if the sailor is bad we will sink.”

Sonam Jamtsho of Punakha Higher Secondary School said that if the Bhutanese people were to gain political maturity they would have to do it now, under the leadership of His Majesty the King.

“My only concern is that the new government might be more interested in power than in the country,” he said. “I feel that the prime minister should not be given too much power.”

Khandu, a retired soldier from Chubu Gewog, said that although he was confident that the Constitution, a vision of His Majesty, would eventually benefit the nation and the people, he had doubts that political parties would create problems and divisions between different dzongkhags and the people. “As long as we maintain the present system of government this nation will continue to enjoy peace and prosperity,” he said.

In a vote of thanks the chairman of the Punakha DYT, Namgay Pintsho, said that the people viewed a Constitutional democracy with the deep concerns and apprehensions that it might mean the end of an unprecedented era of peace and stability. But His Majesty had commanded the drafting of the Constitution and initiated political reform despite repeated pleas of the people who believed that Monarchy was the best form of government for Bhutan. Therefore, today, in the presence of His Majesty the King, the representatives of Punakha dzongkhag pledge their full support for the Constitution although it represented a change that they had not even imagined in their dreams.