To Make Law from, To Teach

This was posted on my Facebook on 14 March 2018

With the two NC elections completed and one just a corner away, going by data, one of the majority of aspiring candidates are teachers. Everyone just say, they want to serve TSA-WA-SUM. 
But, what could be the actual rationality behind it? Is it the power and title to become Dasho? Is it the attractive thobthang?

or is it because Teachers are most qualified to review the national policies and enact laws? or is it they really feel that they want to serve the nation in a bigger role than at the school level as often claimed to be? or is the teaching profession become so worthless that teachers are trying to run away from this so called NOBLE Profession?
One aspect is sure, majority of them would be able to speak in the parliament but does it also mean, will they be able to speak with substance and wisdom that is expected and demanded by the nation's highest law making institution. While it is encouraging and good that law makers should be formed of diverse group including teachers but it is also cause of concern that hundreds of teachers either resign or look for better opportunities outside teaching including elections and politics.

Major Comment 1:
Pema Wangda : Do NOT under estimate the power n capabilty of any common human being both women and men. I think to my perpective even Lord Buddha had to first learn n realize the root cause of suffering and pains as a human we dwell upon and only to seek out liberation from these before attaining enlightment...i dont see any challenges for any Bhutanese citizen of any profession to recieve and participate in any body of organisation provided he/she is not handicapped by birth or certain unforeseen ailments...NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE AS THE WORD ITSELF SAYS I M POSSIBLE

My Reply: 
I am not underestimating power of capability of any common man la. I am sure, you will go through comments by Dorji Tshering below. NC as the nation's highest decision making body, requires skilled already developed and ready made for the nation to move forward la. As the highest decision making body, it should not serve as trial and error place where five years is spend on learning. While I acknowledge and agree ur arguments but I also believe that these institutions particularly when our democracy is in very nascent stage, requires even more ready made intellectual who are already familiar with global development, national policies and visions so that they not only make good decisions as matter of process but more importantly, smart decisions. 
Having said this, I am not against the participation of teachers but more concerned that our education system loses too many well experienced teachers who have developed and acquired so much knowledge on teaching and finally leaves the system without having to share such indispensable knowledge to our future citizens. 
Appreciate your comments la.

Comment 2: 
Phurba Phuba My dear friend, lets trust our people. with 3rd election around the corner, our people have gained enough wisdom to elect the best. they know the best. No profession is better suit than other to be MP. Teachers too have basic requirement. We should not worry too much for teachers elected as parliamentarians. They are only handful of them.
 My reply: Dear Bro, I completely agree that Bhutanese people are gradually maturing in political decision making and making better choices. I am not against the teachers either participating or wining elections but more on the effect of those elected both in theinstitution of democracy, honestly considering their know how on running a nation through reveiw of policies and enactment of law. I am more so concernd on the plight of teachers in the country, resigning in huge number every year unlike any other sector or trying to get transferred from teaching category. What is the reason behind such measures by our teachers for them? Is it because of flaw in system of education we have in Bhutan, is it because our teachers are underpaid and overworked, is it because they are deprived of opportunities of career enhancement and exposure. MoE must take moral responsibility in ensuring teaching more attractive that even if there is an opportunity to become PM, teachers would not take the risk of quiting teaching job because it is so attractive. Teaching profession should be not be the last choice because it is a plce where we produce the nation's future. I personally feel, ministry as parent has not been able to convince our teachers to stay in their job and feel the recognition of serving the nation in the name of Noble profession.

Dorji Tshering I like to WARN you it’s a very long comment: and clarify at outset that reference ‘you’ in the comment is referred to aspiring candidates: not to Sonam Tshering. 

I like to say the questions you have raised here are critical and that these questions can be related to all aspiring candidates whose main reason contesting for office of the National Council ‘mostly and hugely’ talks around serving TSA WA SUM; with little or no concrete proposal of what value as a representative he or she can bring. 

Actually, declaring the commitment to be useful (serving) to the TSA WA SUM is fine. Obviously you are suppose to do that or arguably everyone as a citizen has that responsibility! 

But it is generally understandable to get questions like Mr Sonam Tshering has raised when an aspiring candidates’ 10-15% of 25-30 minutes of interview time is spent talking deeply about ‘serving’ TSA WA SUM without good answers to questions such as ‘how do you intend to do that as a member of NC?’. 

For instance: from anyone who comes forward to contest for the office of the NC and declares to be at the heart of the national politics, I expect you to show me what issues or opportunities you are going to address and facilitate; how you are going to do that; what challenges do you foresee in doing that; what are your plans to overcome the challenges; and questions like why should I believe that you are the person I can trust to make them realise etc. 

Well, one might argue that NC is a house of review and opportunities to work around issue-based projects/initiatives or on such working modalities as I have pointed above is unrealistic. And, if you are one of those candidates with such doubts, then I think you are not ready yet to be taking part in the elections. 

This is because; if you, who claims that you are a person of abilities to represent a constituent, cannot think beyond ‘confined zones of doing business’, I just can’t trust you are indeed capable of showing and taking me and the nation to the new horizon or soar to the different levels of development heights. So, does it worth your time and the nation’s time and resource to be spending on you, for five years if you are elected? 

Again, you might argue, no politicians are experts nor are they expected to be an expert who is able to frame plans and policies themselves. Fine. I agree. 

But isn’t it the responsibility of you as a leader to point at some vision, mission, goals, objectives, targets, timelines, resource capabilities and strategies, etc.? Why do you not think such narratives mentioned and spoken about in your ‘manifesto’ will look less smarter than just spending time telling what is Tsa wa sum and that you are going to serve them! 

It is understandable that not all leaders are strategists or knowledgeable in every sphere of a nation’s business. But, should I not believe that you must be at least good at approaching to people who are actually subject experts or experientially knowledgeable and that you should be able to consult and gather at least ‘sound’ plan of what do you want to do in five years tenure: besides ‘review of laws’ or as you might say: ‘serving the TSA WA SUM’! 

Okay, let me get to the point what I believe is the reason behind putting up this opinion so passionately here in Mr @Sonam Tshering’s post. 

Both you and I know elections happen only once in ‘five’ years: five years is ‘half’ a decade: a half a decade of a country’s history should not be filled with ‘mere’ flow of events - which I am concerned of if a person who is representing in the Center of national politics isn’t good at coming with smart plans of doing things for the improvement of the society. 

And do you not agree me in considering that there are a lot of areas we need to do for further improvement of life and living of the people in the country? To name some of such areas could be but certainly and obviously not limited to them are: rising unemployment, economic stagnation, widening inequality, gender inequality, environmental issues, governance challenges, poor labour skills, education, social security systems, so on and so forth! 

Well, I shall keep it to this for now. 

Please read ‘you’ as being referred to anyone who is contesting for upcoming elections and if you think you fit into the category I described. I know some of the aspiring candidates do have vision, plans and targets set and has clearly made their case of why the nation must vote for him or her: so to them, kindly consider this opinion to be non-admissible! 

If anyone reads until this line: I apologise for making my comments too long. But I don’t intend to be sorry for what I said: rather I am happy to debate if any contestants disagree - for I consider sound debate as one means of doing politics and certainly one of the main instruments of ‘democracy’! 

Tashi Delek.

My reply: Thank you
My😊

My 

To Make Law from, To Teach

This was posted on my Facebook on 14 March 2018

With the two NC elections completed and one just a corner away, going by data, one of the majority of aspiring candidates are teachers. Everyone just say, they want to serve TSA-WA-SUM. 
But, what could be the actual rationality behind it? Is it the power and title to become Dasho? Is it the attractive thobthang?

RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THE ERA OF INFORMATION BOMBARDMENT

 Disclaimer: This article was published in IXth Volume of Bhutan Law Review, Bhutan National Legal Institute on 21 Feb 2018

Right to privacy is absolute. However, state must protect right to privacy of a person and his family's right to privacy. Free speech is a fundamental tool and teeth of any democracy and Bhutanese democracy is no exception. On the other hand, every person should have right to be secure in their private lives, their documents, their homes and family. It is even more important for a small nation like ours, where everyone knows everyone.

Are our electoral laws too restrictive and the citizen’s right to information forgotten?

Disclaimer: This article was published in Kuensel on 17 March 2018

I am thousands of miles away from Bhutan. Like me there are thousands of Bhutanese across the world. Though we are all away from our country, we are eagerly waiting to participate in the upcoming National Council and National Assembly elections. We (most) would like to exercise our franchise of voting. To vote, we have the right to know about our candidate(s).
Voting is not merely about filing up postal ballot or pressing the voting machine. It is the biggest decision each one of us would make for the next five years, a half a decade to elect a person who would represent us in nation building and more so in building a vibrant democracy in the country.

Being away from home, the only way to know about candidates is either through formal or informal medium. Media whether social media or mainstream media are more formal way of knowing about them. Informally, either the candidates or their relatives or supporters reach us through social media or other means to support that candidate. The best avenue for us to know about our candidate is through mainstream media as they are expected to inform the nation about each candidate in a fair manner.

The recent news of media being directly or indirectly pressured by the Office of the Media Arbitrator instituted by the Election Commission of Bhutan (ECB), including asking apologies and action taken reports is a worrisome and a cause of big concern. Such steps have sent shock and panic among the media fraternity about freedom of press, radio and broadcast in the country. It is not only those working in the media, but we, the voters are equally weary of such steps by the media arbitrator. ECB must remember that, thousands of Bhutanese cannot attend the candidate’s zomdu in person and the only way to get more information about how our candidates perform and what they want to do for the nation can only be accessed and assessed through media reports. Otherwise, it would be like voting blindly based on connections, relatives or family members and not based on the merits of the candidates. Is just watching half an hour clip of their debate, which is often inaccessible online to those of us abroad adequate for voters to take informed decision? When there is no information, how does ECB expect us to take informed decision as a voter? If the voters are deprived of information about our candidates, the very principle of voting and election is nullified. Democracy is threatened and democratic values and principles lost.

As a voter, we want our media to not only to tell us the profiles of candidates and their manifesto, but to go beyond to find out the past good deeds and bad histories of our candidates. As a voter, we can understand and make our decisions more carefully. Media is recognized as the fourth estate. The right to freedom of press, radio and broadcast are explicitly recognised, as fundamental rights by the Constitution so is the right to information and right to vote.

The freedom of media is not the freedom of media per se, it is the right of people and media is a medium through which these rights are given to people. Right to information must in electoral sense mean right of the people to know about their candidates, political parties in place and what they can do for the nation. Informed decision means, voters know about candidates, their strengths and weaknesses. Does the Office of the Media Arbitrator have the authority to curtail these rights in the Constitution? Do such steps by the Office of the Media Arbitrator promote the citizen’s right to information and make informed decisions in the electoral process? When voters are deprived of the right to know about their candidates, where is free and fair election?

If media make mistake whether intentionally or unintentionally, the Office of the Media Arbitrator or ECB should respect the laws of the country and follow proper procedure by reporting it to Bhutan InfoComm and Media Authority (BICMA) since BICMA is the statutory authority, authorized by the parliament to regulate the media. The Office of the Media Arbitrator or ECB should report to BICMA to take actions against those erring media. Media Arbitrator’s office is established under the delegated legislation and has no authority to override laws passed by the parliament or the power to curtail or restrict constitutional rights of the people or media. Media Arbitrator or ECB does not have unfettered power and must act within the limits of the electoral laws specially, if any steps by ECB or its authorized agents infringe on the rights of citizens in making informed decision. Interference of any kind by the Office of the Media Arbitrator or ECB on the functioning of media without involving BIMCA or Journalist Association of Bhutan (BICMA) or the Media Foundation could only set a wrong precedent and induce threat and unnecessary self-censorship among the media and ultimately failing their role as the fourth estate. Further, such direct interference would encourage many other institutions in the country to directly interfere in media functions and deprive their right to independence and freedom.

It is therefore, highly recommended that ECB and its agents during the election has the duty to conduct the elections in free and fair manner but shall not in any manner curb the rights of the media. Democracy shall not be the mere process of voting but of making informed decision by exercising the right to information. It is only through information that an informed decision can be made and media must continue to work without fear and favour in informing the nation.

Are our electoral laws too restrictive and the citizen’s right to information forgotten?

Disclaimer: This article was published in Kuensel on 17 March 2018

I am thousands of miles away from Bhutan. Like me there are thousands of Bhutanese across the world. Though we are all away from our country, we are eagerly waiting to participate in the upcoming National Council and National Assembly elections. We (most) would like to exercise our franchise of voting. To vote, we have the right to know about our candidate(s).