Young king and young democrats for young democracy

Practically, it is impossible but the regime claims it does. The changes are on, at each pace, but what matters for all is what will that yield.

Changes ought to bring in reality the feelings in people they their time has changed that their parents. Changes are thoughts in action, not in words. Practice makes it clear if changes have really come.

The endeavor that regime makes no progress in favor of establishing people as the ultimate force of nation building. The first of its instances, the young king led Bhutan government, takes an unclear step towards changes what he calls it a democracy.

The National Council elections are nearer when I sat in front of my laptop to write this. The southern borders are about to be sealed. The government said it was important to seal the border to avoid possible infiltration of ‘people from the camp’. The other threats are minors.
The presence of ULFA and BODO camps is seems omnipotent. Or does it mean the guerrillas in the ULFA camps that ‘people in the camp’ refers to? Dear Phuntsho Wangdi, can you please give further details on this phrase, precisely to which people are you referring to.

The king is young and the parliamentarians are to be young. The young democracy is obvious. Khesar might have learnt how important it was to incorporate the views of members in decision making while pursuing academicia in Briton environment but do all the aspirants have learnt it. Most have come up under the autocratic system, with undisputable psychology of one-man decision is all wise in issue of national importance.

The reflection of this character will be there in young ‘democracy’. This is not different than a Chinese democracy, where the party exists but decisions are taken by people, countable in a hand. The provisions in the draft and proposed constitution in Bhutan has empowered people. The parliament is given very miniature role and the whole authority is sneaked to state head. The democratic institution, parliament is described in five sub-articles while a family role in national politics and decision making is described in over two-dozen sub-article. This amply reflects the concentration of power and importance that the rulers in this country are giving.
Majority of the decision are bottlenecked at the palace. Whatever the decision parliament may make, the king has been authorized to cancel at his intellect. Does this not a glorifying a family than an institution. In democracy, parliament must remain above monarchy, to inculcate the culture of ‘majority in decision making’.

Be certain of one fact that the democracy in Bhutan will be short lived. Fairly, this will not be a democracy coz those taking over the charge of democratic leaders are taught and brought under that culture where autocracy has been the practice. Can you dream of getting apple from a mango tree?

Please dream it. Best wishes are here for you!