Druk National Congress - Political Organisation of Bhutan

Religion & Culture

Refugee

Human Rights

Politics

DNC

Bhutan History

Bhutan Today

Press Release

Home

 

PRESS RELEASE / ARTICLE

New Delhi
May 12, 2008

DNC hopes Indian Prime Minister to advice Monarch on Inclusive Democracy


Druk National Congress welcomes the visit of Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Man Mohan Singh to Bhutan on 16th May. Dr. Singh is accorded the honour of being the first foreign Prime Minister to address the joint session of newly constituted Parliament of Bhutan. DNC sincerely hopes that Indian Prime Minister will use this opportunity to point the inherent flaws in exclusive and elitist democracy to the Bhutanese Kings and counterpart. This will serve as a reminder to the King to resolve the outstanding political crisis, in which our country has been gripped for last two decades.     

DNC trusts that Indian Prime Minister will support and guarantee Bhutan’s sovereignty and integrity and would assist her in International and regional forum as well. 

Rongthong Kunley Dorji
(President)

*****

Open Letter to Member of Parliament, Bhutan
by Rongthong Kunley Dorji

Sir,

First of all, please accept my sincere congratulations on your electoral success.

The relentless campaign by pro-democracy forces, demanding the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan, has finally yielded results. But non-the-less, the steps taken are still exclusive and essentially anti-people in nature.

Your electorate has bestowed upon you their trust, and the responsibility of acting on their behalf in protecting their interests and working for their betterment. Democratic elections is not a race to decide the victors and the vanquished, it is a competition to serve the people.

It has also fallen upon your shoulders to adopt a new Constitution for Bhutan next month. Fate has presented you with the opportunity to remedy any remaining undemocratic and anti-people provisions in the draft Constitution. Because of this important task on your hands, which has significant ramifications for the future of our country, I want your undivided attention, and urge you to give utmost consideration while deciding on the constitutional provisions while adopting the Constitution.

Kindly give thought to the following points :

1. As is the norm in all democratic countries, the Constitution must provide for the instituting of a National Human Rights Commission to regularly monitor the human rights situation, and to scrutinize and document human rights abuses, and to also provide redressal to victims of human rights abuses, irrespective of whether the State or any non-State machinery is responsible.

2. For proper representation and to allow for the freedom of political choice, the strength of Parliament must be increased from existing 47 to 75. More constituencies, in proportion to population, must be delimited, so that representation is proportional and adequate, and so that the needs of the electorate can be effectively addressed. In this context, it will be also pertinent to reserve three seats for representatives from the Central Monastic Body/Drukpa Kargyu bodies, two seats for representatives from Nyingmapa associations and one seat for a representative from Hindu associations. This is important, because each respective culture, and its heritage, including the interests and rights of their members, must be accorded equal opportunity in raising their concerns in the highest peoples’ decision making body, so that their interests are also safeguarded and preserved.

3. Voting rights of monks and gomchens must be restored. They too are citizens of Bhutan and have a right to decide on the fate and administration of the country. Depriving them of their voting rights has categorically rendered them third–class citizens in their own country. In a democracy, even criminals have a right to vote, so excluding any Bhutanese of suitable age from exercising his or her right to vote, is unfair, biased and undemocratic.

4. The stipulation of eligibility to stand for election is outrageous and anti-people. Vide the Election Act Section 173 (d) and 174 (d), i.e. a candidate must “possess a formal university degree” to be eligible, means that only the elite and exclusive are eligible to participate in the democratic process. In a nation where we have given the highest respect and accordance to our national language and culture, and have also take pride in this being the supreme sign of our identity, we contradictorily undermine and insult these very values that we have accepted, by excluding graduates from traditional educational institutions, who essentially go through the same qualificationary processes as other western-type institutions. This is nothing less then equivalent to burning our national dress in favour of the western suit. Even normally, in widely-accepted democratic norms around the world, every citizen of the electorate’s choice, has an inalienable right to vie through elections for an elected post, irrespective of race, sex, language, religion or educational qualifications or background. The will of the people should be the only stipulation. It is the electorate who is vested with the power to accept or reject his candidature. Articles such as Article 23(4)(b)], “terminated from Public service”, Article 23(4)(c)], “is convicted for any criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment”, Article 23(4)(d)], “is in arrears of taxes to the Government…” are those which are of concern. Because it is every citizen’s inalienable and inviolable right to nominate competent candidates to stand for elected posts, amongst those whom they feel can work in their interests, the right to nominate candidates to stand for elected positions must be recognized. These preposterous stipulations must be removed and right of every individual citizen must be restored.

5. Bhutanese citizens who were engaged in the democratic struggle are termed as ‘Ngolops’ and have been barred from participating in the democratic process. Even their kith and kin have been denied the right to participate in the democratic process. Their only “crime” being their steadfast campaign demanding for democratic and human rights – the fruits of which will now be reaped by the Bhutanese population. Their sacrifices in getting Bhutan to this point gives them the right to be allowed to participate in the democratic process.

6. The role of the Opposition is over-circumscribed (Article 18), and leaves political parties vulnerable to questionable dissolution (Article 15(11)). Article 10(22), which entails that the concurrence of not less than two-thirds of the total numbers of members of each House respectively, can remove the right of immunity of a member, affords enormous powers to a ruling party to oppress or persecute a weak opposition. Such a scenario is best demonstrated in the make up of the present National Assembly, in which the Ruling Party has 45 seats out of the total of 47, with the Opposition Party holding on to only two seats. Such provisions must be removed.

7. A multiparty system is a common characteristic of a democratic setup, and provides the required variety of choices and competency to the general public in regard to policies and issues, and therefore must also be instituted in Bhutan. The recently concluded elections under a two-party system does not qualify as truly democratic, because the fundamental criteria of democracy has not been met. Observe the two-party electoral process in the US and the run-up procedures to the final elections - a lot of effort and money goes in to selecting the people’s choices of the final nominees. In Bhutan’s case, a two-party arrangement, unless executed in completeness, has and will end up being just a perceived “democracy”, and will actually be unable to offer a truly democratic choice to the people. A multi-party democracy is what can address the needs of the Bhutanese people.

8. The draft Constitution has misguidedly granted enormous powers to the Monarchy. Under such a Constitution, a vibrant and functioning parliamentary democracy will be impossible to achieve. Residuary legislative powers is vested in the Monarch (Article 2(16)(e)). Article 20(7) provides undue powers to the Monarch to sack a Prime Minister or his Cabinet. The Monarch’s legislative powers are extensive, including independent powers to send messages (Article 10(8)), convene extraordinary sessions (Article 10(12)), to nominate eminent persons constituting 20% of the Upper House (Article 11(1)(b)), to block Bills even if passed by both Legislatures (Article 13(10)&(11)).

Moreover, Article 2 prohibits the Parliament from amending the Monarch’s Constitutional powers, and essentially means that a Monarch’s powers are beyond the purview of the Parliament and the people.

It is a gross misconception that keeping the Monarchy above the Constitution and the Law protects the Monarchy. On the contrary, such provisions actually prevent the Parliament and the people from protecting the Monarch, when necessary. God forbid, if an untoward incident were to occur, where a member of the Royal Family thus “protected” under the Constitution, commits a murderous act against another such Royal Family member or even the Monarch, the Parliament or the Judiciary would be powerless to take any action on its own. There is no guarantee that in future all “protected” Royal Family members will be appropriately well-behaved, and could possibly turn out to be a potential threat to a ruling Monarch or his heir(consider the Royal massacre in Nepal, where the Government had no choice but to declare Crown Prince Dipendra the King even after having murdered his father, the King. The Monarch and his family were above the law and when the onslaught came from within, there was nothing the Parliament or the people could do. Even if the massacre had been perpetrated by another ‘protected’ Royalty, there would have been little the Parliament or the people could have done). Thus, vesting ultimate powers with accountability to the Parliament will be a deterrent to any future errant member of the Royal Family from even contemplating such ideas, for fear of appropriate action by the Parliament and the Law. Consider this very carefully for the future well-being and safety of the Monarch and the Monarchy. It is the people who decide on the system of governance of their choice, whether it be a Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, and having opted for a Constitutional Monarchy, it is the same people who will ultimately protect the system and the Monarchy.

Your conscience is but your own. Follow your conscience while adopting the Constitution. The hopes of the Nation, the Bhutanese people, and the excluded sections of society rests on you.

**********

Dated: 10th March, 2008
New Delhi

WE DEMAND RESPONSIBLE ACTION FROM EUROPEAN UNION OBSERVERS.

A team of 15 observers from 13 different European Union countries arrived in the Bhutan to observe the first ever general election that is scheduled on the 24th of March, 2008. The Druk National Congress welcomes this. But taking into account the recent remarks of the team, it puts into doubt the effectiveness of the team in observing the happenings in the backstage that will determine the ultimate outcome of the elections. It is obvious that the process is being observed only at face value. Further, we apprehend that EU observers will bless Bhutan’s general election in spite of all shortcomings. Mr. Javier Pomes, the Chief of the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM), said, “In our observations so far, most of the processes comply with international standards.”.

In fact, he and his team members understand and acknowledge the fact that only two political parties both headed by the relatives of the King are allowed to function and participate in the political process. Despite the elections being only two weeks away, fundamental human and democratic rights for the people still does not exist. People are still arrested for engaging in political activities that does not favour the present regime and its cronies. Large sections of the population are excluded from the process including the people in exile. Are these practices in compliance with International standards?

We are aware of the existing democratic practices and traditions prevalent in European Countries. We are therefore, disheartened to hear such irresponsible remarks. Bhutanese democrats are no different from democrats in European democratic countries; we too accept a Constitutional Monarchy that is akin to the Constitutional Monarchies in European countries. Henceforth, we hope that the Team will advise the Bhutan regime to work towards a genuine and inclusive democracy.

Rongthong Kunley Dorji
President.

******

New Delhi
March 3, 2008

Druk National Congress stands with 10,000 refugees in this hour of personal grief


Druk National Congress is deeply anguished and saddened at this moment of greatest tragedy heaped on the unfortunate families by an outbreak of fire at Goldhap Refugee Camp (Jhapa, Nepal), leaving more than 10,000 refugee homeless. The Bhutanese refugees, already living nightmare of a life as refugee, since last seventeen years – whole family holed up in a one-room thatched roof house, without access to basic amenities like electricity etc. Their daily food, as well as nutritional intake, has drastically shrunk. Quality of their life has gradually deteriorated over the years. Whatever little household belongings these 10,000 people have managed to acquire, have now been gutted in this fire. It is indeed a very welcome gesture of UNHCR and Nepal government to extend their help promptly and the Druk National Congress expresses its sincere gratitude to both. In addition Druk National Congress appeals to international community to extend their help to the affected poor refugees. The donor agencies, relief agencies, non-government and humanitarian organizations, working in South Asia can play a critical role in alleviating the plight of hapless refugees.

Druk National Congress firmly believes that Royal Government of Bhutan should come forward to help the victims of fire, as the cause is humanitarian and politics must be relegated to periphery. Further, throughout the world Bhutan is recognized as a Buddhist Kingdom and practitioner of compassion and kindness. This unfortunate incident provides an opportunity to the Royal Government of Bhutan to demonstrate that indeed the country practices the teachings of Buddhism, in words and spirit. And above all, these victims are primarily bona fide Bhutanese citizens and by virtue of this, they have a right to receive help from their nation. Therefore, this is high time that Royal Government of Bhutan come out of its slumber.  

Of late, the third-country resettlement has featured prominently in local and international news. We firmly believe that it is the personal choice of each refugee to decide his/her own fate. But at the same time, majority of refugees sheltering in camps, want to return Bhutan with dignity and honour. The present crisis has precipitated owing to non-Bhutanese issues and we cannot afford another crisis because of it. 

Therefore, in this backdrop, the verification of Bhutanese and non-Bhutanese has become very important. The Joint verification process, jointly initiated by a team of Bhutan and Nepal Government in early 2002, was suspended over some trivial differences. Since both the nations are witnessing historic developments, Druk National Congress, urges both governments to resume the stalled verification process in order to evolve a just, fair and honourable permanent resolution of Bhutanese refugees crisis.

 

Rongthong Kunley Dorji
President

*******************************************************************

Dated : 22.01.08

DRUK NATIONAL CONGRESS DENOUNCES BOMB BLASTS IN BHUTAN

Rongthong Kunley Dorji
President


The Kuensel, the official newspaper of Bhutan, reported that four bomb blasts rocked Bhutan between 11.10 am and 2.10 pm in four different Dzongkhags(districts) on January 20, including one in the capital, Thimphu. A day later the United Revolutionary Front of Bhutan owned responsibility for the blasts.

The Druk National Congress(DNC) categorically denounces this act and also condemns the use of any violence to achieve democracy. It believes that a violent approach undermines the very foundation of democracy that is based on majority rule and minority rights. Democracy achieved by such means is never stable as it justifies the use of force to achieve ends whenever disputable issues arise.

The DNC has repeatedly appealed to the Bhutanese Regime to resolve the protracted refugee problem and also warned about subsequent residual consequences of its delay. It has also urged the Regime to make the democratization process inclusive so that all Bhutanese can participate in this effort. The Regime has refused to see reason and is using the democracy exercise to consolidate its hold on the governance process even more. Given the Regime’s adamant stand on these issues, precipitation of such incidents was inevitable.

However, having had to unwillingly announce democratic reforms in Bhutan(evidenced by the half-hearted, cosmetic and manipulative approach to the process that is purported to unfold democracy in Bhutan), such ‘incidents’ could easily become a pretext for the Regime to stall the democratization process. At the same time, by declaring that it will be going ahead with its ‘democratization process’ despite the blasts, this incident also provides the Regime an opportunity to send an image-building ‘message’ to the international community that it is serious and sincere about ‘democratizing’ Bhutan.
Either way, it is the Regime that stands to ‘apparently’ gain, and little does it benefit the establishment of democracy or ensuring justice in Bhutan.

The initiation of the democratization of Bhutan is the outcome of years of effort and struggle. The DNC is of the opinion that in the present context, the process, though deeply flawed, needs to begin without delay. Fine-tuning democratic governance is a process that can improve with time. Both electors and the elected alike discover the ropes as time goes by, learning and being compelled into shouldering their respective responsibilities with dedication and sincerity. And ultimately working to resolve all issues that concerns Bhutan and its people.

The DNC will not let up in its efforts to continue urging the Royal Government of Bhutan to rectify the shortcomings  in its present democracy exercise, and will persist towards resolving all issues concerning Bhutan and its people within the quickest possible timeframe, but it also demands that the RGOB continues the process of democratization as per schedule and as previously declared by it.

**************************************************************************

Unmasking King’s Democracy

Rongthong Kunley Dorji
President, Druk National Congress,
New Delhi, India.

 The King of Bhutan has introduced a unique type of democratic process in Bhutan. The international community has already congratulated Bhutan (King) on “historic election" with the pre-conceived notion that genuine democracy has finally been introduced. Sadly, the basic tenets of democracy are totally absent in Bhutan. People are goaded to press the electronic voting Machine (EVM) and this process is no different to the voting system initiated by the Third King in 1953. Prior to voting, background details of each candidate are required to be submitted to the King. If there is slightest chance of any candidate, having potentials to challenge the authority of the monarch in future, his/her candidature is disqualified. A wooden box ballot contains the names of two contenders and people are required to vote ‘Yes’ and ‘No’. This practice was prevalent until 2006.

The first so-called 'historic election 2007' was conducted under a socio-political environment, where no fundamental human rights and democratic rights are recognized. It will be sacrilege to mention that the polling is conducted under 'free and fair' atmosphere. Consider these facts - the freedom of speech and expression is restricted; the freedom of press is banned; the assembly and association of people are banned; and so on and so forth. King introduced a ridiculous and outrageous stipulation, as prerequisite eligibility, i.e., candidates aiming to contest election for becoming a Member of Parliament (MP), must have a university degree of western education format. Large section of population, endowed with experience and patriotism, are thus denied their inalienable democratic right to participate in politics and to become MP. The power of Monarchy remains intact till date, as the National Constitution does not have any control over Monarchy. Can this practice be really called democratic?

In universally accepted democratic practice, a multi-party system must exist. However, in Bhutan, only two political parties have been allowed to operate, both having close proximity with palace. One of these parties is People's Democratic Party (PDP), headed by Mr. Sangay Nidup, maternal uncle of King, and the second is Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT) headed by Mr. Jigme Thinley, matrimonial relative of King. The third party, Bhutan People's United Party (BPUP) formed by Mr. Sigay Dorji, was disqualified/unregistered by Election Commission on November 27, 2007, on the ground that this party doesn't have will, competence, experience, qualification and appropriate support to contest elections. In addition, all political parties in exile are banned. Obviously, King will be amenable, if either of his 'confidantes' Jigme Thinley or Sangay Nidup becomes Prime Minister. Though, I have a feeling that King will prefer Singay Nidup for the Prime Minister’s Job.  

The candidates, successfully elected, in this recent election for National Council, offer a prelude to the scenario that will be unfolding in the forthcoming National Assembly election. Majority of them come from a bureaucratic background. Even two 26 years old young person are “elected." It is a matter of grave shame that inexperienced young persons are allowed to occupy seats in National Council. They would be overwhelmed, overpowered and dominated by the five nominees of King. King's most obedient, trusted, loyal and experienced personals, are still working under him. These people would be drafted in the Upper House. These nominees would undermine the true democratic ethos in the National Council. Being 'yes man' to King, I have an apprehension that they will place the interest of Monarchy on a higher pedestal, compared to the interest of public at large. I foresee no change in legislations; they will continue to preserve the structures and systems that prevailed in absolute monarchy and protected Monarchial interests. Even the losing candidates would be eventually drafted back to bureaucratic setup. The only discernible change in election is - the wooden ballot has graduated to Electronic Voting Machine. Can this practice be called dawn of democracy in Bhutan?

There were sporadic revolts against Fourth King since 1974 and most rebels were arrested in their early stages. However, 1990s witnessed the first full-fledged revolt against King by Lhotshampas and certain section of Sharchopa. It demonstrated that 70 percent of the population resented and disapproved King's policies. The aftermath of rebellion resulted in human rights abuses and atrocities, on a large scale. Relatives of rebels are barred to participate in current democratic election; in fact, they are always under the government surveillance. The political prisoners of 1997 eastern Bhutan uprising continue to be incarcerated and there is no ray of hope for their release so far. The democratic voting rights of monks, Gomchen, Anim are denied. Are they not Bhutanese citizen? Is this a democracy?

The familiarization tour by PDP and DPT throughout country has garnered enough action. The people, villages, districts and perhaps regions too, are sharply polarized on party lines. Discords, friction within family are created. Both political parties are engaged in wooing voters by offering bribes in the forms of cash and kind. Election Commission has failed to live up to its promise to root-out the corruption in electoral practice. In fact, King, Election Commission and political parties made a mockery of Constitution.  

For last hundred years, the people of Bhutan have been ruled by King like animals.   Therefore, I once again ask - Are Bhutanese willing to live yet another animal life by meekly submitting to King's anti-people and anti-democratic polices? When King agreed to become a Constitutional Monarch, it was expected that he would be remorseful for his past misdeeds and would therefore usher the true democratic reforms. But now, it appear, he is incorrigible, remorseless and cold-hearted. These democratic reforms are only aimed to ensure that Bhutan remains in the iron-grip of Royal family and Royal family continues to accrue all the benefits, as if Bhutan is personal estate of King. We, the people of Bhutan, should know that all of us are equal to King. Destiny of monarchial institution rests in the peoples’ will. Democracy in Bhutan, at present, exists only on paper. The true democracy must be enjoyed by the entire population, rather than few privileged ones.

The Druk National Congress reiterates its resolute stand that we will wedge a relentless non-violent struggle against the present form of 'democracy', till it is transformed into an inclusive genuine democracy. The Druk National Congress has re-drafted the Constitution encompassing all democratic aspirations. Though our expectation from King is minimal, yet the Druk National Congress continues to harbor a feeble hope that there is still some time for King to re-correct the current undemocratic process. If King wants to ensure the longevity of his monarchial institution, onus lies in his present course of action. Kings must know the universal truth - in order to enjoy benefits, other people must also be supplemented with same benefits. Druk National Congress warns, if Bhutan falls in the grip of disturbances, unrest, instability and anarchy in near future, only King will be responsible.

******* ********************************************

Dated :24th October, 2007

The Election Commission of Bhutan received a Royal Decree from the Fifth King on 30th June, 2007 to conduct Parliamentary elections “as per the provisions of the Draft Constitution”. This decree officially admits that the people would enjoy constitutional rights enshrined in draft Constitution, including fundamental rights.

However, the political process unfolding inside country is to the contrary. So far the Election Commission, the Judiciary apparatus and the administrative machinery has entertained only two royalist parties, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT). Mr. Sangay Nidup, President of PDP and maternal uncle of the King and Mr. Jigme Thinley, President of DPT and relative of the Queens are given unlimited access to conduct themselves in whatever they wish to fulfill their objectives. But, genuine democrats are either excluded from the process or intimidated and threatened with imprisonment when they voice their opinions. Under such circumstances, can the International Community accept the Royal Government of Bhutan's democratization process and the Parliamentary elections as a free and fair? In such an environment, we believe that the Parliamentary elections going to take place in 2008 is total a total farce.

The Druk National Congress questions the role of the Judiciary and the Government machinery. The common people are denied fundamental, civil and political rights as enshrined in draft Constitution. As we dispatch this press release, seventeen people, whose only "crime" was to voice their political opinion, are still imprisoned in Samdrup Jongkhar and Mongar. They were arrested for assembling and freely expressing their opinion on the present politics. Most of them are relatives of democrats who participated in the 1997 demonstrations in Eastern Bhutan against the Royal Government. Some of them are those who had been released after serving prison sentences for the 1997 uprising. Why is the Judiciary not protecting their fundamental rights?

Both the Chief Justice of Bhutan and the caretaker Prime Minister are turning a blind eye to the present political situation. The aiding of the royalist parties by the Judiciary and the Administration has aroused fears that both establishments would brush aside the pleas of the general public even beyond 2008. In order to allay these fears, the Government must immediately release these detained persons and recognize their right to freedom of expression. Moreover, the Government must come up with policies that ensure political inclusiveness. Every citizen of suitable age has an inalienable right to contest for any public office, irrespective of race, caste, sex, language, religion or any other status. People from all sections or strata of society must be made eligible to participate in politics, without bias and without stipulations that disqualify candidates unjustifiably. Lack of mass representation and continuation of the present exclusive polices is bound to create dissatisfaction and turmoil in the future. We are certain that the situation could go beyond the control of respective stakeholders then. The ball is in court of the Royal government of Bhutan.

Rongthong Kunley Dorji

President

***********************************************************************************

20th August, 2007

Obituary

R.B. Basnet - a moderate reticent leader
R.K Dorji

The demise of Mr. R.B. Basnet on 18th August, 2007 is a great loss to the Bhutanese refugee community and the Bhutanese people. He was the President of Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP), a prominent leader, and very helpful towards the Bhutanese refugee community. Above all, his kind hearted, generous, amenable and humble disposition inspired his friends. He was soft spoken and reticent.

He hailed from a respectable family in Damphu, Cherang (Bhutan). After completing his studies, he joined the civil service in Bhutan. His last assignment with the Royal Government of Bhutan was as Managing Director of the State Trading Corporation of Bhutan. He was best of friends with my brother, Pema Wangdi.

When the citizenship crisis erupted in southern Bhutan in the late 1980s, a group of government officers led by Minister Om Pradhan and Mr. Teknath Rizal, along with Mr. R.B. Basnet and Mr. Bhim Subba submitted a petition to the King seeking a resolution of the problem. However, the situation in southern Bhutan deteriorated further due to the mishandling of the issue by a few immature self-proclaimed leaders. In this intriguing period, I met Mr. Basnet, Mr. Janga Bahadur and Mr. Harka Bahadur at Phuntsholing. I advised them to submit an apology on behalf of the community to the King in order to bring an end to the nascent problems in the region. Mr. Basnet heeded my advice and went to Thimphu where he discussed my suggestions with Mr. Om Pradhan. But Mr. Om Pradhan informed him that by then the time had elapsed to make amends. With the Government of Bhutan upping the suppression in southern Bhutan and casting suspicions over all Lhotshampas officials, Mr. Basnet's stay in Bhutan was unbearable and thus he was forced to flee for Nepal on 16th of June, 1991.

After departing from Phuntsholing, I went home to Samdrup Jongkhar. Unknown to me, a fabricated report alleging that I was in collusion with agitating Lhotshampas was already fed to the King by the trio of Gup Sonam Drukpa, Maj. Pem Tshering and Kunzang Namgyal. My friends warned me about my impeding arrest and urged me to flee Bhutan. But I stayed back because I felt there was nothing for me to run away from. On the 18th of May, 1991, I was arrested in Samdrup Jongkhar, taken to Thimphu and subjected to inhuman torture. After fifty days, I asked to sign a ‘devious release document’ in Dzongkha and English by the then Home Minister, Dago Tshering and released from detention. As soon as I reached home, I immediately went to Gawahati to treat my injuries sustained during the torture in imprisonment. From there, I fled to Nepal and reached Kathmandu on August 3, 1991.

Mr. Basnet, Mr. Bhim Subba, Mr. Rakesh Chhetri and Mr. Gurung met me on the 15th of August and shared each others' problems and recounted our past good-old days. In his capacity as President of Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP), he offered me the Vice-President ship of his party. I declined his good gesture because at that time I had submitted a petition to the King through the Chief Justice, Sonam Tobgay, and was awaiting a response. Non-reciprocation of my petition and the continuation of the stringent suppression in Bhutan compelled me to establish the Druk National Congress, along with Bhutanese friends in exiles and the blessing from our countrymen, to advocate for the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan.

Mr. Basnet and I held numerous meetings regarding Bhutan and what our contribution should be for its future. He always stressed for a peaceful and non-violent movement. I always held him in high esteem and respected his advice and suggestions.

In 1996, Bhutanese parties came together in a single platform to form the United Front for Democracy in Bhutan (UFD) to stress for democracy and to seek a just resolution of the refugee issue. I was elected as the Chairman of the UFD. In the capacity of UFD Chairman, I came to Delhi in 1997 to seek support from the Government and the people of India for our cause. I was arrested by the Indian authorities at the behest of the Royal Government of Bhutan to have me extradited to Bhutan. After spending fifty days at the Lampur Beggars' Home and fourteen months in judicial custody at Tihar Jail, the High Court of Delhi released me on bail in 1999, after finding no evidence to support the grounds on which the Royal Government of Bhutan had sought my extradition. After my release, I continued to maintained close contact with Mr. Basnet.

My last meeting with him was on April 16, 2007 at Siliguri, in West Bengal. We discussed issues about Bhutan for three hours. His was clear in his principle and once again advised me to always remain steadfast in the peaceful movement. Our next meeting to chalk out the plan for the coming year's activities was to be held in October this year at New Delhi. The meet is scheduled to draw in numerous supporting organisations and individuals. His absence will be severely felt.

I for one will miss my friend, counsel and colleague. I have lighted butter lamps and offered prayers and prayed for the peace of his pious soul.  

 

ARCHIVE

 

e

 

Extradition Trial

Friendship Society

Photo Gallery

Cons & Comments

Web Links

Recommend Us

Contact Us

Copyright © 2003, Bhutandnc.Com   All rights reserved.