Parliament’s fifth session

The National Assembly has announced that the fifth session of the Parliament will begin on 28th May. That’s in about three weeks.

But, I still don’t know what will be discussed. And I still haven’t received the bills, if any, that will be introduced in the fifth session. So I’m at a loss about how to prepare for the Parliament’s imminent session.

It appears that the government has recently submitted four bills to the National Assembly. They are the Childcare and Protection Bill; the Child Adoption Bill; Water Bill; and the Financial Services Bill. The first three are on the National Assembly’s website.

I’m assuming that these bills will be introduced in the National Assembly’s fifth session. So please send me your comments.

 

Facebook Comments:

Comments

  1. confused says:

    This indicates some signs of management failure on both sides which often results in a blame game. But with little initiatives from both sides, this problem can be and should be solved in the larger interest of the happy people of Bhutan.

  2. i would suggest financial services bill need to be looked very carefully otherwise Bhutan cannot make corruption free.
    specially passing bill

  3. One of the qualities that I admired in ex-minister Sangay Ngedup was that he was a ‘Go-Getter’. So as one of his protege, I’d have thought that it could have rubbed on you.

    I suggest that you be a go-getter and acquire “what will be discussed” NOW and prepare rather than crying foul later.

    Otherwise you seem to be doing reasonably well…

  4. Yangchung says:

    At least this coming session, they are going to discuss something of social importance (for needy common folks!). I am impressed!

    Its not surprising to know through one online news that our country is having the highest amount (quality wise as well quantity wise) of drinking water in the world, but ironically we keep hearing that a lot of our village folks and students go thirsty. And worse still, students have been even keeping aside their studies and fetching water most of the time. So its high time our decision makers step up high, strong, committed and make citizens lives better, not just theirs!

    Other than that I have no suggestion as such.

    Thanks.

  5. We are urgently in need of a good Water Act. People in villages face lot of water related problems. I would suggest the Honourable OL to go through the Water bill carefully and thoroughly. This is because though Bhutan is known for good Water resources, people still face acute water problems be it drinking or for irrigation purposes. We need an Act which will benefit the public. I heard that people in Shaba have been facing drinking water problems for quite a long time and there are lot of water related disputes esp. irrigation in many dzongkhags.
    The honourable MPs should not only make laws but must make sure that people should have good and safe drinking water and that there should be equitable distribution of water for irrigation purposes so that unnecessary disputes can be avoided.
    Should we not think about the Trans-boundry Water disputes and how to go about it? I don’t know whether it can be included in this Bill.
    Other two bills are also very important.

  6. Tangba says:

    CONSTITUTION MUST COME FIRST.

    Before discussing any bills, I think it is very important to hear the judgment of the Supreme Court over the constitutionality of this government over the CDG case.
    If the SC says it is unconstitional, the government has no legal rights to discuss any bills. In fact, the government can not stand.It must be dissolved following the verdict.
    If the SC says it is constitional, even if people may not agree with the judgment of the SC, the people will accept the judgment of the SC and and take this government as constituionally justified government. They have the right to do anything and discuss any bills.
    What do you people say?

  7. I would first wait to see the SC to have its family complete and then wait to see the next strategic move of the govt and OP.

  8. Tangba, please don not go half cocked all the time. It is boring and kills the enthusiasm of the readers in this blog. CDG is not a constitutional issue – remember that. SC cannot pass a verdict over it unless some one files a case. The issue is: who is going to do that and under what constitutional provisions?

    In the beginning, I too was opposed to it – but NOT for its unconstitutionality. However, over a period of time and considering certain developments that have taken place in this country and the foreseeable implications of those development over the long haul, I have come to accept that the CDG may be something useful and necessary to forestall certain inevitable consequences arising out of the confusing period that we have been thrown into. After more than two years, those confusions still persist and we are no where close to understanding our individual responsibilities in making democracy work for us. The only thing that is starkly evident is that every body seems to have suddenly acquired extra mouths and hands to lambast at the government on things they have very little understanding about.

  9. Guest, did you read the chain of comments under “Dasho Damcho on LG”? If you did, I have the following questions for you.
    1.Did you hear what National Coucil said about CDG?
    2.Did you hear what Election Commissioner said about CDG?
    3.Did you hear what the Opposition said about CDG?
    If you have heard them all, are you still telling us that our Constitution can take a back seat if something seems to work but not necessarily according to our Constitution? You mean they can do things by finding ways around keep the laws powerless and handicapped?
    It does not matter how capable this Prime Minister or his cabinet is. It does not matter how wonderful the plan and policy of a government is if it does not abide the Constitution in the first place. North Korea and Communist China have got wonderful plans and policies that work in their own countries but they do not have a Constitution and that is the main motive behind all those cries, problems and international pressures. We are fortunate. We have a Constitution but if we do not follow it, it is no better than having no Constitution at all, right?.
    Another very important thing, if we can not protect and defend our Constitution(section 11 of article 8), our Constituion will not be strong enough to protect and defend us in the future from the tyrants of democracy. You can mark my words.

  10. Sorry Guest, I forgot to answer your question.
    Your question: SC cannot pass a verdict over it unless some one files a case. The issue is: who is going to do that and under what constitutional provisions?
    There are two answers for your question:
    Answer #1: The Opposition. It is the fundamental responsibility of the Opposition party to ensure that the Government and the ruling party function in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution(section 1 of article 18). If the Opposition do not file the case, the Opposition can be prosecuted in the Supreme Court for failing to discharge its duty as mentioned in the Constituion.
    Ans 2: Any bonafied citizen of Kingdom of Bhutan(section 11 of article 8). You or I or anyone.
    *******************************************
    You see, rules are made, laws are enacted and Constitutions are ordained and adopted. If everybody plays by our rules, abide by our laws and do things in accordance to our Constituion, there will not be any problems. If not, things will take precedence sparking a disastrous chain reaction leading to chaos in the end. We don’t want to see that happen in our country. I definitely don’t.

  11. Dear Tangba,
    As I said in response to your other post, I am not inclined to believe in a particular line of argument merely because “Dasho Damcho” said so. I happen to be capable of my own thinking and arriving at my own deductions based on my own understanding of the matter.

    I have heard what the NC, the ECB and the Opposition said about the CDG. But have you considered the possibility that whatever they have said so far may be nothing more than emotional outbursts designed primarily to discredit the DPT government in the eyes of the voters, rather than based on some explicit provisions in the Constitution? If it were constitutionally incorrect, then why hasn’t the NC, ECB and the Opposition filed a case with the SC against the government? If you are arguing from an ethical stand point, I will go with you but where hard politics is at play, ethics has no role and is not the basis by which an act should be judged. Since everyone keeps harping about the unconstitutionality of the CDG, just tell me where it is written in the Constitution that CDG or something akin to it is disallowed.

    It is not a question of the Constitution taking a back seat but about interpreting it in the letter and the spirit – and not in the manner that suites one purpose and objectives.

    Let us not compare the rulers and enforcers of North Korea and Communist China to those of Bhutan. In those countries, the slightest dissent and you are mowed down brutally; you even slightly voice an objection and your tongue will be cut off and shredded and fed to the scavengers on the street. Move a little on the wrong direction, and your legs will be severed from your body and used for pounding tofu. These countries succeed because their system allows them to eliminate all oppositions to their plans and programs; they ruthlessly suppress the likes of you and me.

    I also agree with you that the Opposition has the responsibility to oppose any unconstitutional activity on the part of the ruling government. I fully support you there. The question now is: Why isn’t the Opposition acting? Let us dispense with the deluge of mindless hot air … lets see some concrete action from the Opposition or the NC or the ECB – if they truly believe that the government is doing something unconstitutional. I will be happy to hear some concrete legal interpretation from the SC. Like I said, ethically, I too disagree with the CDG but that is neither here not there. However, there is no justification to flog the government based on moral grounds. There are higher and more important considerations that must be kept in mind.

    And, since you can see that I am not going to be the one to file a case against the government in the SC, perhaps, you as a bonafied citizen of the Kingdom of Bhutan (section 11 of article 8), would you like to go ahead and file the case?

    At the end, I am honored to have engaged you on this because unlike some, you have been kind enough to give me counter arguments with a level headedness that I admire. But I would like to say that you need to move out of the domain of the romantic and the euphoric and step into the real world.

  12. Tangba says:

    Guest,let me paraphrase the situation as follows to make it clearer and simpler for you to understand.

    1.You and I can argue for days and nights about whether the CDG is unconstitutional or not. But will that matter? NO. It does not matter what you and I think.
    2.You and I can argue for days and nights about WHY the National Council, the Opposition Party and the Election Commission said CDG is unconstitutional. But will that matter? NO. It does not matter what you and I think.
    3.You can I can argue for days and nights whether these important institutions in our country said CDG is unconstitutional as “nothing more than emotional outbursts designed primarily to discredit the DPT government in the eyes of the voters” or, not. But will that matter? NO. It does not matter what you and I think.
    4.BUT you and I do not have to argue at all on one thing. Both of us have heard what the National Council, the Opposition Party and the Election Commission said. They all said one thing: CDG is unconstitutional. Does that matter? YES. VERY MUCH. A democracy is like a chair with four legs. These three institutions are the three legs of that chair, the government is the fourth.
    5.The National Council, the Opposition and the Election Commission have clearly stated that the “objectives” of the CDG and the CDG “activities” headed by the MPs “contravene” our Constitution. You do not have to argue with me on this because I can’t help it anyways. It is their opinion and their statement, not mine.
    6.It is not convincing enough if only the National Council or the Election Commission or the Opposition said that CDG is unconstitutional. We can think that the institution is perhaps making false allegations to discredit the government but this is not so in case of CDG. The opinions about CDG is surprisingly unanimous given that these three institutions function independently of each other. Thus we can not deny the intense credibility of their common statement.
    7.Section 10 of article 15 of our Constitution states that a political party shall stand dissolved by declaration of the Supreme Court, if the objectives or activities of the party are in contravention of the provisions of this Constitution.
    8.Also, we got to let the people of Bhutan know who is right and who is wrong for once and for all. Are the three institutions making false allegations to discredit this DPT government or, is the government led by PM JYT becoming more tyrannical everyday, not bothering to listen to anyone and dare do things not permitted by our Constitution? Why should we keep our people in doubt and why should our people be satisfied to remain so in ignorance? Doubt and ignorance only breeds distrust. The faster we remove these doubts, the more efficient a government will function and the people can sleep in peace.We need to prove that this government is really working for our country and our people without any political self interests and according to our Constitution. But how?
    9.Section 1 of article 18 of our Constitution says that the Opposition must ensure that the Government and the ruling party function in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. When it has stated that the CDG is unconstitutional, it automatically implies that the government did not function in accordance with the provisions of our Constitution. Therefore it is the fundamental responsibility and sacred duty of the Opposition to sue the government to the Supreme Court and affirm their “allegations”. Only the Supreme Court and, only if the Supreme Court says that CDG IS CONSTITUTIONAL, the government will be “constitutionally justified government” to run this country, to enact laws and pass bills. Until this is done, people have the right to think this government has breached our Constitution (according to the three institutions) and therefore the government is unconstitutional. People have the right to not comply the rules and the laws enacted by this government. People have the right to reject all the bills. People have the right to boycott this government altogether.
    10.The three institutions said that CDG is unconstitutional. Should we let this government ignore their opinions? Can we afford it? What if we will have a prime minister in the future who will legalize amphetamines in our country despite the warnings from the National Council, the Election Commission and the Opposition? What if we will have a prime minister in the future who will sell some part of our country to foreigners despite opposition by the three institutions? Shall we remain silent thinking that the three institutions are making allegations to discredit the government? Then will not this CDG case take precedence in the future? Will not a future prime minister say,”I can ignore these three institutions like JYT did?”. I have no personal agendas but these are few questions that come to my mind and I am worried. What do you say, Guest? I think you are a sensible educated man.

  13. I am surprised at the way some people bulldoze their ideas into others and length of time people spend here. Who are these …constitutional experts?

  14. Dear Tangba

    I reiterate that my views on the CDG will NOT be influenced by what the NC, the ECB or the Opposition party think and say about it. I have my own opinions and for now, I will stay with it.

    To be fair, I will admit that my stand on the matter (CDG) is influenced by what I believe is political expediency. For the greater good of the country and the people, I am ignoring the morality or the lack of it, behind the REAL purpose of the CDG. As I said earlier, I am convinced that, given some recent developments that have taken place in the country, the CDG may not be as evil as I believed it to be. In fact, I am convinced that its need at this juncture in our history cannot be overstated. I know that this view of mine will not be received well by a lot of people but I dare say that it would be because most people do not have the patience to analyze things in depth.

    I am sorry but I have no time to explain my line of thinking. It is rather complex and will take quite a while to explain why I have concluded that CDG may not be such a bad idea.

    Regarding the CDG being unconstitutional, other than people telling me that it is unconstitutional, I have not yet been convinced that it is so. I want to know exactly where and under which provision it is so. In addition, like I said earlier, the NC, the ECB and the Opposition have only talked against it. They have not yet had the courage or the conviction to file a case against the DPT government in the SC. This clearly tells me that they damn well know that the Constitution is not very explicit about it.

    I may be a supporter of the DPT but certainly I will not support it if they are breaking a law. As long as a law is in force, it is immaterial whether the law is good or bad or irrelevant. Everyone has to adhere to it, as long as it stands. If the law is bad, then the thing to do is to change it but no one has the right to oppose it while it is still in force. By the same token, no one should victimize someone simply based on conjecture. As far as I understand, all the objections by the NC, the ECB and the Opposition against the legality of the CDG is nothing but conjecture. If it is not, take courage and take it to the Supreme Court. If the SC decides that it is unconstitutional, I will not argue the case any further.

  15. Amused, do you mean to say bulldozing ideas like the DPT bulldozed the CDG bill into the Parliament and passed it despite opposition from the NC, EC and the OP?
    You are really amusing!!

  16. mediawatch says:

    Tangba is the ghost writer for OL and Guest for PM! Interesting stuff, debates and arguments! keep the stuff rolling!!

  17. To mediawatch: thank you for the compliment but I am not a ghost and definitely not anyone’s ghost. Right now I am alive and kicking life hard. If I be, I will be my own ghost.
    ********************************************
    To Guest: I feel like I have just tried to pour water into a pot with a closed lid. I can see that not a single drop of water has entered into the pot!! I don’t blame you but my own stupidity. Should I try to open the lid once more? It may be a futile effort again but never mind. I will die trying than try dying.
    You believe that CDG is good. I also tend to believe that you are right but that is not important. Your beliefs and my beliefs are not important. What you think and what I think do not matter at all. And this is not the reason I am wasting my time arguing with you. What is important and what MUST and SHOULD matter is this: the opinions of the National Council, the Election Commission and the Opposition. We do not necessarily have to agree with the NC, the EC or the OP but we must respect what they said and have to say. This is the very essence of a democratic government. The government must listen. You have reiterated yourself very clearly that the Government does not have to listen to what the NC, or the EC or the OP said. A government can do whatever it wants to do if it thinks it is good for the country by ignoring what they think about it. A government can do anything as if the other institutions do not exist at all. I ask you: then why do we have to have the three institutions? Will it not save us much trouble and cost not to have them at all and allow the government to run this country single handedly on their own?
    I told you a democratic nation is like a chair with four legs. The four legs are the Government, the National Council, the Opposition and the Election Commission. Our King is sitting on the chair. The chair itself symbolizes the country and the people. Each leg of the chair functions independently but in synchrony with each other, check and balancing, with one common goal: to maintain stability of the whole chair. Now consider the following events.
    1.If all the legs are strong, the stability of the chair is 100% (Very good)
    2.If one leg breaks but the other three legs are still very strong enough, the stability of the chair is 75%. (Good)
    3.If two legs break, the stability of the chair is 50%. The chair will either stand or collapse.(Not good)
    4.If three legs break, the stability of the chair is just 25%.(Bad)
    5.If all legs break, there is no chair at all.(Very, very bad)
    The present government condescendingly ignoring the views of the other three institutions of our democracy is like the chair with three broken legs. The chair is not stable. It is standing on the edge of collapse. In other words, it is called tyranny of democracy: one institution single handedly decides all the matters in a country irrespective of all the other existing institutions in the country. Sometimes it is the military. Sometimes it is the Opposition. Sometimes it is two or more institutions combined but usually it is the government itself. And this is what is happening in our country right now. All the ideas that the DPT party thinks good are bulldozed into bills despite opposition from the other institutions. I know Bhutan can not be compared to South Korea or Communist China as of now but we never know. If we remain complacent and botherless, we may become comparable to them in one or two decades. We will have a democracy for show; a Constitution in golden letters to worship; a powerless Monarch; and a man, who will take pride in his democratic election, will call himself a people’s prime minister but actually he is a ruthless powerful dictator! You can mark my words. This has happened in many countries in the past and it is still so in many countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. Under the façade of democracy, there is no democracy at all. I am worried if it will happen in our country too.
    All I can do is just pray.
    PALDEN DRUKPA LHA GYAL LO.

  18. Dear Tangba

    I agree with you that opinion of the people and those of the NC, ECB and the Opposition must matter. The government must pay heed to what is being said. However, the ruling government must alone decide whether what they are saying serves any useful purpose or is in the best interest of the country and the people.

    The ruling government, the NC, the ECB and the Opposition has completely different mandates from the people – given their uniquely different roles and functions. As such, it is unfair on your part to require the ruling government to see things in the same perspective as those of the NC, ECB and the Opposition. It is not correct for you to endorse the imposition of the will of the NC, the ECB and the Opposition on the government. It is neither right nor plausible that the actions of the government must be governed and directed by the opinions of all and sundry.

    The ruling government has been elected by the people to perform a job and they alone must decide how to perform their responsibilities. Should they fail, they alone must take responsibility and pay for their mistakes. But for now, unless there is a breach of the Constitution or that there is a national security at stake or that they are doing something against the Crown, it is the call of the government. Like I said, if the CDG is against the Constitution, let them take the matter to the SC and let there be a legal interpretation by the authority empowered to do so. The NC, the ECB and the Opposition are certainly not at liberty to interpret the Constitution.

    Dear Tangba, like I said, this is the real world and so let us shed the cloak of naivety and look at things squarely on the face and see things for what they are. The DPT will always protect its party interests – they are a political animal. Sadly, as long as they do so within the law, there is nothing that you and I can do – except cry hoarse and still get no where.

    Tangba, it is not necessary for you to keep reminding me of the four legs of the chair and who is sitting on it and who are supposed to be holding the four different legs of the chair. I get the feeling that you forget that the four different positions of the chair’s legs mean that the four different entities must take care of four distinctly different functions at each of their posts. If all of them were to perform a uniform and like duty, there would be only one leg to hold.

    I am not going to respond to the charge about the PM turning into something of a monstrous dictator. To believe that we will ever arrive at such and eventuality is to concede that the Bhutanese people are a bunch of morons without an iota of intelligence or self respect.

  19. Guest,you are right but please don’t teach me how a democratic government works. I have taught law and politics for the last 25 years. And I told you not to debate about your or my opinions because that does not matter at all. Allow me to summarize the scenario.
    The National Council, the Election Commission and the Opposition said that the CDG is unconstitutional.
    The Opposition must file the CDG case to the Supreme Court. However, the National Council and the Election Commissioner can do it as well.
    The Supreme Court must judge the case and decide whether CDG is constitutional or not.
    If the Supreme Court says CDG is unconstitutional,that’s it. We go for a new election.
    If the Supreme Court says CDG is not unconstitutional, the government prevails.
    But will the Opposition file the case?
    NO. Their personal lives will be at stake. If the Supreme Court pronounces CDG as unconstitutional, the government can not stand and so will the Opposition. What does that mean? It means the OL and Dasho Damcho will lose their jobs, their lavish salaries and allowances for the next four years will be gone too. And what more? There is no guarantee that they will return to their present post. So I think the Opposition will not do anything even if it had said that the CDG is unconstitutional.
    Then will the National Council file the case?
    In the case where a government is dissolved by the verdict of a Supreme Court, the National Council may or may not have to be automatically dissolved depending on the history and traditions of that particular country. Which means what? It means the National Councilors are also not sure if they will lose their jobs too. So, I doubt they will file the case.
    Then will the Election Commission file the case?
    Honestly I don’t know. It depends on their sense of righteousness. The Election Commission can file the suit. They have nothing to lose. This government or the next government, the EC will remain the same.
    Then can anyone of us file the case?
    In other countries, they have a Civil Court which grants protection for these citizens but here in Bhutan, we don’t. You have to file the case at your own risk. If you want to be a martyr of justice and democracy like Mahatma Gandhi who is willing to tolerate all the physical and non-physical, direct and indirect repercussions, you may do so.
    THE END.

  20. Can CDG case be directly filed before the supreme Court or should it pass through the High Court which is still without Judges?

    Is CDG Unconstitutional? Which Article and Section of the Constitution states that CDG is unconstitutional?

  21. Tangba, I get the feeling that you are not a Bhutanese and thus I suspect that I have been wasting my time engaging with you.

    One: I know of no one – absolutely NONE – in Bhutan who has been teaching law and politics for the past 25 years. Thus, I will take that declaration with a heavy doze of salt.

    Two: Where in the Constitution does it say that if the SC finds that the CDG is unconstitutional, that the government will be dissolved?

    Three: You don’t even seem to know that the NC is the Upper House. Thus, even if it were to be true – which it is not – that the NA and the Opposition is dissolved the day the SC decides that the CDG is unconstitutional, the NC will not be affected by such a dissolution.

    If it is agreed that there is no Mahatma Gandhi to take on a supposed public cause, then it is time that we don’t talk about it endlessly.

  22. Tangba,I did not mean the two parties and neither do I have the expertise to make such judgment. I meant few individuals. I understand that you enjoy sharing “your” ideas with others and certainly “some” of your points are “reasonable” but I am wondering whether you are claiming to be a constitutional expert through your views and perhaps too quick to arrive at conclusions. I do not mean to say whether you are right or wrong though.

  23. To Guest:
    I always thought you are a sensible educated man but the more you speak and the more you write I realize I am wrong. In your own words let me put it this way: you are a moron without an iota of intelligence! But I hate to assert such accusations on others without solid reasons. Let me keep it very short this time because I think now I know who I am talking to, perhaps an idiot. Don’t want to waste my time any more.
    One: There are about a million people in this country, eight hundred thousand people to be more exact. I am surprised you speak as if you know each one of them. Doesn’t that sound like the frog in the pond?
    Two: Read the Constitution,boy. Read the Constitution. I hate students asking questions without doing their home works first.
    Three: Read well or don’t read it at all. I wrote above that the National Council “MAY OR MAY NOT” have to be automatically dissolved depending on the history and traditions of that particular country”
    Thank you for proving yourself.
    ***************************************************
    To SonamG:
    One: In other countries, they have a Constitutional Court that decides on such cases related to the enforcement, protection and interpretation of their constitution. The verdicts of these Constitutional Courts are final and binding. No appeals. Here in Bhutan, we do not have such a Constitutional Court but we will have the Supreme Court which will perform like a Constitutional Court. So, any matters related to the interpretation of our Constitution must be filed to the Supreme Court. It will be the final authority on its interpretation(section 11 of the first article).
    Two: The National Council, the Election Commission and the Opposition Party are saying that CDG is unconstitutional. It is not explicitly mentioned in our Constitution that ‘the CDG is unconstitutional’ but there are ample evidence in our Constitution that construes CDG is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, whether the CDG is truly unconstitutional or not depends on the judgment of our Supreme Court.
    ******************************************************
    To amused:
    A constitution that needs a “constitutional expert” to interpret is like a survival manual you can not read. A good constitution must be easily comprehendible by almost everyone in their homes or can be interpreted by getting a neighbor’s help. Every men and women who can read Dzongkha or English can very well understand our Constitution provided they read it well. In this sense, our Constitution is not bad at all. We have drafted a great constitution. No doubt. It just remains to see if we can use our Constitution as it is meant to be. Our older leaders always had the tendency to doing things by going around the laws and the politicians everywhere have the tendency to interpret the constitution for their own political interests or to fulfill their own personal agendas. Therefore, occasionally different groups of people and institutions will come to loggerheads like our NC, EC and OP on one hand and the DPT government on the other hand over the CDG. It is the primary duty of the Supreme Court to interpret and judge the constitutionality of the CDG for them. All parties must accept the SC’s interpretation whether they like it or not.
    Finally, ideas are great arrows, but there has to be a bow. And politics is the bow of idealism. You are right.
    *****************************************************
    This will be my last comment on this topic.
    Cheers everyone.

  24. Tangba, I finally got your goat? Hahaha …

    Let the readers decide who is the idiot and moron here.

    I may not know every single Bhutanese – but I do know that there hasn’t been a school or an institution in Bhutan dating back to the last 25 years – teaching law or politics. Therefore your claim that you have been teaching law and politics for the past 25 years is a lot of crap.

    RIM now introduces Bhutanese law to the fresh law graduates but in my knowledge that hasn’t been more than 10 years.

    I was under the impression that the Bhutanese population numbered less than 700,000. Your figure of a million – eight hundred thousand to be exact as you say – is way above the national figure. Obviously, you are attempting to include the illegal Nepali population who falsely claim to be Bhutanese and who are currently in Jhapa. Even then, the figure is way off mark.

    I have read the Constitution and I have not seen a clause that vilifies the CDG or something akin to it. Now, if you are claiming that you have read the Constitution, pray tell me, Oh Great Teacher, the Article and the Clause where such a thing is stated to be unconstitutional. I will then accept it.

    Forget the name calling – stick to the issue, will you please?

  25. Thinlay says:

    The CJ of SC is a main author of Bhutan’s Constitution. Can he interpret constitution contrary to what he suppossedly wrote???

    Cheers

  26. To Thinlay:
    Yes he can if he is an asshole and that’s why we “NEED” to have “FIVE” Justices in the Supreme Court. We can trust no one. When they have to make judgments on any issues reaching them, they will have to vote, either by secret ballot or by open ballot.For example,the CDG case.It is possible that not all of them will agree that CDG is unconstitutional but that is not what matters.What is important is how many of them thinks CDG is
    “unconstitutional” and how many of them think it is “not unconstitutional”. If 3 of them think CDG is unconstitutional, that’s it. CDG is unconstitutional by a verdict of 3/5. This is democracy.

  27. It is a stupid remark to say that the CDG will be decided by the SC based on what the CJ or the other (currently) three judges think.

    The matter will be decided solely based on what the written Constitution says on the matter – if at all it is covered in the sacred document. The Judges of the SC including the CJ are not the moral guardians of this country – they are the custodians of the Constitution. Therefore, they have to go by the book – in this case, the written Constitution. If the matter is not covered in the Constitution, then they have no other option than to say that it is NOT unconstitutional.

Leave a Reply to Thinlay Cancel reply