We all have the right to free speech and expression. We also have the duty to respect other's privacy and reputation.
DISCLAIMER
All the stories posted here are author's personal view and does not reflect anybody's or represent any institutions or organization to which the author is associated unless otherwise mentioned or referred or sources cited after the article. Therefore, any errors are also of the author. Any post which may be directly or indirectly related to any institutions where blogger may be affiliated does not in anyway represent these institutions. Readers may use the information for any educational or research purpose at their own risks on accuracy and authenticity of the information provided herein. The photo(s) from the author's private collection may not be reproduced in any form, electronic or otherwise without prior permission.
The information given here are updated and authenticated to the extent possible and to the best of the knowledge of the blogger and not otherwise.
Anyone wishing to use all or part of the posts published on this blog may kindly obtain permission from the author by emailing at sonamphuentsho111@gmail.com.
NOTE: The blogger is not responsible for any damages caused for whatever reason by using the information posted on this blog unless provided to the user with written permission from the Author.
Wednesday, 6 December 2017
Sunday, 13 August 2017
Gearing for land of Opportunity- The United States of America
Before, you apply for Visa online, I found that following documents and information are necessary.
- Passport
- CID
- Details of Spouse and children
- Details of Parents
- Details of Addresses
- Health records if any
The first step in the online application is to fill up the DS-160 Form
What is DS-160 Form
How to fill up DS-160 Form
First click here.
On click, one should be able to view as shown below
Click on this option and select INDIA, New Delhi
Then go to the Language, Select English from this option
After selecting the English as Language, click on the start an application
Gearing for land of Opportunity- The United States of America
Before, you apply for Visa online, I found that following documents and information are necessary.
- Passport
- CID
- Details of Spouse and children
- Details of Parents
- Details of Addresses
- Health records if any
The first step in the online application is to fill up the DS-160 Form
What is DS-160 Form
How to fill up DS-160 Form
First click here.
On click, one should be able to view as shown below
Click on this option and select INDIA, New Delhi
Then go to the Language, Select English from this option
After selecting the English as Language, click on the start an application
Friday, 7 July 2017
In recent times, media have started publishing photo(s) and details of people suspected or accused of crime resulting in naming and shaming preceding a judicial process. Such trend is worrying and unprofessional as it violates not only the fundamental rights but also legal rights. Even more worrying is the publication of only a selected few that could construe as bias reporting and discriminatory undermining the basic human rights of these people. No freedom is absolute and freedom of media is not an exception. Media must enjoy the right to exercise the democratic culture as Bhutan embarks on the journey of democracy. However, such democratic culture must stay within the limits of the Constitution. Fountain of justice is the prerogative of judiciary and not Media. Therefore, media has neither constitutional nor legal right to punish any person including naming and shaming. With the adoption of the constitution of country, Bhutan’s criminal justice system rests on Article 7 of the Constitution, the Fundamental Rights. This means that every person has right to life, liberty and may be taken only with due process of law. He or she also has right to security, equality before law, equal protection of the law, protection against discrimination, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, protection against arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, home or correspondence and unlawful attack on his honour and reputation. Due process of law and fair trial are cardinal rules of criminal justice. Thus, media by naming and shaming of any person without due process of law, no matter how heinous the crime that person might have committed or suspected to have committed or accused of committing would tantamount to violation of his numerous fundamental rights under the Constitution. It could cause an accused or suspect and his or her family members an irreparable damage to their reputation, unimaginable mental trauma and stigmatization in the society particularly a small society like ours. Researches around the globe revealed that, the media trials tend to influence judges and subconsciously a pressure is created to affect the sentencing. Courts have stated that, in the eyes of public, media trial provokes public hysteria akin to the extent of lynching mob making the fair trial nearly impossible and regardless of the result of the trial, in public perception, the accused is already held guilty and would not be able to live the rest of their life without intense public scrutiny. Thus, it is now a universal settled law that when a conflict arises between fair trial and freedom of speech, the former prevailed because the compromise of fair trial for a particular accused will cause them permanent harm whereas the inhibition of media freedom ends with the conclusion of legal proceedings. Besides the Constitutional Rights, any suspect or accused also enjoys numerous legal rights. Section 96.2 of the Civil and Criminal Procedure of Bhutan states, “Finding of guilt against one or more of the parties can only be given when the prosecution to the full satisfaction of the Court has established a proof beyond reasonable doubt.” And Section 207 of the Penal Code of Bhutan requires that a person can be punished only if the elements of the charge where guilt beyond reasonable doubt have been proven to full satisfaction of the court. By Section 6 of the Penal Code of Bhutan, a person can be convicted of a criminal offence and shall not be sentenced otherwise than accordance with this Penal Code. Thus, where does the media derive jurisdiction of punishing any suspect or accused through naming and shaming even before their trial begins. The Media must remember that for any suspect or accused to be punished, the prosecution has duty not primarily to convict, but to seek justice proving the accused beyond reasonable doubt while the accused must be accorded to defend any accusations by all lawful, fair and honorable means, so as not to deprive his or her of life or liberty, through due process of the law. The preamble of the Penal Code states that the law is enacted to “perpetuate good and chaste actions, correct those, who have gone wrong,” guilty not to escape and innocent not to suffer and to secure justice to ourselves and our posterity.” Therefore, how does the pre-trial naming and shaming by media justify such rights of the accused or suspect. Naming and shaming of suspect or accused before formal court proceedings also undermines the pre-trial as well as other rights enshrined in the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code including determination of sufficient cause of accusations made, whether to plead guilty or not (Nolo Contendere). The Code of Ethics for Journalists framed under Section 26(d) of the Bhutan Information, Communications and Media Act prohibits the journalist from reporting judicial proceedings that might affect or alter the trial unfairly or publish anything that is defamatory of any person or organization. The Code also requires the journalist not to identify relatives or friends of any person accused or convicted of crime, or imply guilt by association in relation to such relatives or friends, unless there are compelling reasons, such as relevance to the story being published, or evidence that might reasonably point to such guilt. The Code further mandates that the journalist stand by the principle that all persons are equal before law. It is even more worrying when the media try to name and shame few selected as in the recent cases, the principle of all persons to be treated equal before law and equal protection of law is completely ignored. In fact, such reporting would warrant a suit against such reporter or media for the damage the suspect or accused and his family suffered in the society. In a nutshell, media must remember that presumption of innocence of an accused is a legal presumption and should not be destroyed at the very threshold through the process of media trial and that too when the investigation is pending. The freedom of the press should not degenerate into a licence to attack litigants and close the door of justice nor can it include any unrestricted liberty to damage the reputation of respectable persons.
but also legal rights. Even more worrying is the publication of only a selected few that could construe as bias reporting and discriminatory undermining the basic human rights of these people.
In recent times, media have started publishing photo(s) and details of people suspected or accused of crime resulting in naming and shaming preceding a judicial process. Such trend is worrying and unprofessional as it violates not only the fundamental rights but also legal rights. Even more worrying is the publication of only a selected few that could construe as bias reporting and discriminatory undermining the basic human rights of these people. No freedom is absolute and freedom of media is not an exception. Media must enjoy the right to exercise the democratic culture as Bhutan embarks on the journey of democracy. However, such democratic culture must stay within the limits of the Constitution. Fountain of justice is the prerogative of judiciary and not Media. Therefore, media has neither constitutional nor legal right to punish any person including naming and shaming. With the adoption of the constitution of country, Bhutan’s criminal justice system rests on Article 7 of the Constitution, the Fundamental Rights. This means that every person has right to life, liberty and may be taken only with due process of law. He or she also has right to security, equality before law, equal protection of the law, protection against discrimination, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, protection against arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, home or correspondence and unlawful attack on his honour and reputation. Due process of law and fair trial are cardinal rules of criminal justice. Thus, media by naming and shaming of any person without due process of law, no matter how heinous the crime that person might have committed or suspected to have committed or accused of committing would tantamount to violation of his numerous fundamental rights under the Constitution. It could cause an accused or suspect and his or her family members an irreparable damage to their reputation, unimaginable mental trauma and stigmatization in the society particularly a small society like ours. Researches around the globe revealed that, the media trials tend to influence judges and subconsciously a pressure is created to affect the sentencing. Courts have stated that, in the eyes of public, media trial provokes public hysteria akin to the extent of lynching mob making the fair trial nearly impossible and regardless of the result of the trial, in public perception, the accused is already held guilty and would not be able to live the rest of their life without intense public scrutiny. Thus, it is now a universal settled law that when a conflict arises between fair trial and freedom of speech, the former prevailed because the compromise of fair trial for a particular accused will cause them permanent harm whereas the inhibition of media freedom ends with the conclusion of legal proceedings. Besides the Constitutional Rights, any suspect or accused also enjoys numerous legal rights. Section 96.2 of the Civil and Criminal Procedure of Bhutan states, “Finding of guilt against one or more of the parties can only be given when the prosecution to the full satisfaction of the Court has established a proof beyond reasonable doubt.” And Section 207 of the Penal Code of Bhutan requires that a person can be punished only if the elements of the charge where guilt beyond reasonable doubt have been proven to full satisfaction of the court. By Section 6 of the Penal Code of Bhutan, a person can be convicted of a criminal offence and shall not be sentenced otherwise than accordance with this Penal Code. Thus, where does the media derive jurisdiction of punishing any suspect or accused through naming and shaming even before their trial begins. The Media must remember that for any suspect or accused to be punished, the prosecution has duty not primarily to convict, but to seek justice proving the accused beyond reasonable doubt while the accused must be accorded to defend any accusations by all lawful, fair and honorable means, so as not to deprive his or her of life or liberty, through due process of the law. The preamble of the Penal Code states that the law is enacted to “perpetuate good and chaste actions, correct those, who have gone wrong,” guilty not to escape and innocent not to suffer and to secure justice to ourselves and our posterity.” Therefore, how does the pre-trial naming and shaming by media justify such rights of the accused or suspect. Naming and shaming of suspect or accused before formal court proceedings also undermines the pre-trial as well as other rights enshrined in the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code including determination of sufficient cause of accusations made, whether to plead guilty or not (Nolo Contendere). The Code of Ethics for Journalists framed under Section 26(d) of the Bhutan Information, Communications and Media Act prohibits the journalist from reporting judicial proceedings that might affect or alter the trial unfairly or publish anything that is defamatory of any person or organization. The Code also requires the journalist not to identify relatives or friends of any person accused or convicted of crime, or imply guilt by association in relation to such relatives or friends, unless there are compelling reasons, such as relevance to the story being published, or evidence that might reasonably point to such guilt. The Code further mandates that the journalist stand by the principle that all persons are equal before law. It is even more worrying when the media try to name and shame few selected as in the recent cases, the principle of all persons to be treated equal before law and equal protection of law is completely ignored. In fact, such reporting would warrant a suit against such reporter or media for the damage the suspect or accused and his family suffered in the society. In a nutshell, media must remember that presumption of innocence of an accused is a legal presumption and should not be destroyed at the very threshold through the process of media trial and that too when the investigation is pending. The freedom of the press should not degenerate into a licence to attack litigants and close the door of justice nor can it include any unrestricted liberty to damage the reputation of respectable persons.
Friday, 12 May 2017
Monday, 8 May 2017
Youth unemployment vs. Government policy of overseas employment
The urgency and caution: The desperation of unemployment should not be cause of our youth's future in misery and sufferings in a foreign land.
The comments by the suspended Overseas Agent, if
Friday, 5 May 2017
Thursday, 4 May 2017
What constitutes defamation in the media and social media in Bhutan
What constitutes defamation in the media and social media in Bhutan
Spasmo Proxyvon Plus, Justice and Rule of Law
Spasmo Proxyvon Plus, Justice and Rule of Law
Monday, 1 May 2017
Lawyering for a good cause
Our team using the advantage of legal arguments, converted thier directions in our stall, changed their minds to spend more so that we generate as much as we could, because it is for a good cause.
As days passed, our tiredness grew into strengths and passions to work harder, our hunger manifested into hungers of convincing more already belly packed guest to still try at our stall.
Our discipline of being lawyer translated into gentle gesture of inviting our guests into our stalls and thanked them to visit us again into be next two days.
Lawyering for a good cause
Friday, 21 April 2017
The war between the two constitutional bodies: Whether constitutional or not
My basic analysis is that OAG's argument that the Article 29(5) of the Constitution which states that " The Attorney General shall have the power to institute, initiate, or withdraw any case in accordance with the law" gives power to OAG for this purpose as only provided under the law. Thus, OAG's very power of institution of suit relies on the law made by the parliament which basically means it is an exceptional clause to the power of the OAG. This means, this Article seems to me that instead of empowering the OAG, the Article limits the power of OAG since it states that OAG can only prosecute in accordance with the laws made by the parliament. This also means, that if parliament decides to empower other agencies in prosecution, it can do so, as long as there is law made by the parliament.
Another interesting thing is that in fact for me, Section 128(2) which states "The Office of the Attorney General shall undertake
prosecution of persons on the basis of the findings
of the Commission for adjudication by a Court." makes the OAG to prosecute mandatory once the ACC sends the findings to the OAG which means OAG does not seem have the choice to reject or refuse prosecution. The subsequent sub-section 128(3) which states "(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2), the Commission may carry out its own prosecution of a person
charged with an offence under this Act or take over
the prosecution process from the Office of Attorney
General when the case is:
(a) Delayed without a valid reason;
(b) Manipulated; or
(c) Hampered by interference"
Thus,this section further reduces OAG's power by empowering the ACC to prosecute on any of the three grounds.
Further Section 16 of OAG Act 2015 states that "16. The Office shall prosecute criminal cases in accordance
with the provisions of this Act when referred to it by any
agency of the Government under the relevant laws" which means OAG is required to prosecute when referred by the other agencies.
However, the Section 29, 30 and 31 of the OAG Act grants the discretionary power subject to conditions laid down to prosecute or not to prosecute the cases.
Now reading the Article 29(5), 128(2) & (3), the Section 128 (2) mandates the OAG to mandatory to prosecute while Section 128(3) provides the power to ACC to prosecute under three conditions, I personally feel that both OAG Act and ACC Act are fulfilling the conditions of the Article 29(5) hence should be both constitutional as long as prosecution is carried within the threshold provided under these laws.
The News paper reports
The war between the two constitutional bodies: Whether constitutional or not
Tuesday, 21 March 2017
The right of media should be for justice, not media trial.
It is therefore, important to reflect few invisible lines between the freedom of media and independence of judiciary in ensuring a free, fair and unbiased justice to the litigants.
The article 7 ensures that there is a freedom of press, radio, television and other forms of media. And Section 4 of the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code of Bhutan 2001 gives the right to open trial of every case. This means, during the trial, media has access to all proceedings or for that matter any public interest.
However, equally important are the right to privacy, reputation, gender sensitivity, national interest and free and fair administration of justice. Therefore, the same Article 7 and Section 4 of the CCPC also provides exceptions to the above rights to protect the individual rights and non-interference in the administration of justice.
In short, neither the media nor the judiciary enjoys absolute rights rather both while no doubt has number of rights but also must exercise certain restrains.
The right to open trial is a complementary right to the freedom of media and right to information. However, if these rights are unlimited and absolute, one of the biggest risks and dangers in today’s world is the media trial and character assassination, infringement of individual privacy and reputation and fair trial as media often builds public opinion even before the actual trial proceeds. Media as one of the most powerful tools in dissemination of information to the public has also not been impartial or fair in many cases across the world. Many media are also often driven by its own interest and editor’s individual discretion of how the story is to be told or political affiliations or influences have on certain cases.
Judicial proceedings are not merely debating of certain issue but is about deciding the issues of family, the friends, foes, communities and nation. It is about one’s personal story which are at best kept within the four walls of the courtroom and neither the judge or judicial officers nor the media should divulge such information to the general public on many issues. Media must exercise restraint and self-censoring in issues of personal privacy, reputation, the information that are false or vulnerable to manipulation. Sometimes, some just things seems unjust in the eye of public while some unjust can be seen just.
At the end, neither the court nor the media must derive anything but determination of truth and justice for the litigants or parties and nothing more, nothing less.
Having said this, judiciary as an institution for just and fair society, must uphold the fundamental principles of freedom of press which ultimately becomes the voice of people and access to information. The access to judicial reports, proceedings must be there without any restriction as matter of administration of justice so long as it is in the public interest and within the jurisdictions of the authorities.
It is a universal principle that once the judge decides the case, the judgment becomes a public document. Therefore, it shall be made accessible not only to the media or few fortunate but to everyone in the society. The right to determine merits and demerits or critical analysis are completely legitimate and absolute and cannot be curtailed through any decisions or law as judgments are nothing, but a public property. The citizens shall enjoy the right raise their voice in favour or against the judgment or verdicts passed by the court so should the media.
Media’s role of reporting on the judicial decision is not merely to reflect what is already mentioned and decided but being able to critically analyze, rather transcends way beyond, by way of simplifying the legal issues into common man’s language, critically look at the laws and principles applied and inform the public of consequences of decisions in that case to the society.
Media should be a medium through which people are given to understand that whether the justice is not only done but seen to be done.