University certificates and eligibility

Education qualifications not always matter, but matter when it comes to fulfilling formalities. Get employed in certain companies or get a job with in government agencies are primary areas where university certificates are called for.

Politics is open; very few countries – countable in fingers – have set education criteria for individuals to contest elections. Law is the most rigid taking into consideration the extent of knowledge that lawyers need to have.

Bhutan is one among few countries seeking certificates from aspiring politicians to build their career in budding democracy. Despite small number of graduates, and very few among them looking for political career, the national laws require anyone to have bachelors to contest elections. This is to ensure that lawmakers are intellectually able to determine laws and other decisions for the best interest of the nation.

I remember one Nepali proverb, पढेर जानिन्छ कि परेर जानिन्छ’. Both are correct in one sense and incorrect in other.

The appointment of Sonam Tongye as the new chief justice recently made me rethink on the legal provisions in Bhutan whether the educational qualifications apply for all, equally. It is not undermining that Tobgye knows nothing about laws and legal system. Having worked for years in this very field, he has enough knowledge.

However, how about formalities? Does this mean, one having worked in a certain field does not need qualifications to get job? Optimisms are obviously there that years of hard work are awarded but in disguise it certainly discourages youngsters to pursue academic qualifications.

Questions are alive, whether Bhutan government will entertain willingness of a grade X graduate having worked for years in bureaucracy to be appointed as the secretary or chief secretary of the country. Will a literate farmer aged 60 be eligible for being appointed as agriculture officer?

The constitution says, all citizens shall be equally treated, given equal opportunity and etc. I think Bhutan citizens are equal but some are more equal. The appointment has set precedence that if long term political career holders wish to contesting elections, the application must be treated eligible. Read more!

Bhutan’s Independence Day

Some historians wrote, while most countries in South Asia experienced foreign rule, the small Himalayan kingdom in this subcontinent, Bhutan, was spared. Some Nepali folk songs also mention that Nepal remained independent throughout the ages. The statements hold some truths. These are the only countries in this region not celebrating their Independence Day.

India celebrates Independence Day but never remembers its unification day. Had there been no British rule, today this largest country would have remained dozens of smaller independent nation states.


Has Bhutan remained independent through out the ages? For some reasons or other, China after seizing the sovereignty of Tibet laid claim over southern hilly kingdoms including Bhutan. To counter communist China, democratic India captured Sikkim and laid clams over some parts of China north of Jammu and Kasmir.

India has not claim for Bhutan but practically holds it in fist. Bhutan’s failure to maintain diplomatic relation with northern neighbor has become a boon for this South Asia’s big brother to keep the Buddhist kingdom under control. India has, in principle, no interference in Bhutan but reality has all involvement in economic, political and social dimensions. Over 100,000 Indian military personnel’s presence in Bhutan is not sure of what is it for: protecting Bhutan’s independence or seizing its.

Like for other issues, I googled to know when did actually my country received independence. It failed, and subsequently I failed. Coz my country does not celebrate Independence Day, it certainly does not guarantee that the country remained independent for ages.

About.com came to my rescue. According to the site, this kingdom received independence on August 8, 1949 – the date when new India and Bhutan signed bilateral treaty. Obviously, this could be the Independence Day for some reasons such as:

1. British treated Bhutan as a principle state within its colony until it ruled in India.

2. It was British initiation to install monarchy in Bhutan, in hope to create a buffer state.

3. Bhutan was receiving compensation from the British government.

4. All economy and trade in the country were controlled through Rangpur point in present Bangladesh.

If About.com is correct, initiation is required that this country celebrates its Independence Day or else declares of not being an independent nation. But there is no hurry up coz in one of its edition the oxford dictionary had defined the kingdom to be an Indian protectorate. First lets, redefine the history of Bhutan in that dictionary.

Lets celebrate Independence Day or declare the nation as not an independent. For your reference, I put here the list that About.com generated in response to my query about Independence Day of various countries.

660 BCE – Japan
221 BCE – China
301 CE - San Marino
843 CE – France
976 CE – Austria
10th Century CE – Denmark
1001 – Hungary
1143 – Portugal
1206 – Mongolia
1238 – Thailand
1278 – Andorra
August 1, 1291 – Switzerland
1419 – Monaco
15th Century – Spain
1502 – Iran
June 6, 1523 – Sweden
January 23, 1579 – Netherlands
1650 – Oman
May 1, 1707 - United Kingdom
January 23, 1719 – Liechtenstein
1768 – Nepal
July 4, 1776 - United States of America
January 1, 1804 – Haiti
July 20, 1810 – Colombia
Sept. 16, 1810 – Mexico
Sept. 18, 1810 – Chile
May 14, 1811 – Paraguay
July 5, 1811 – Venezuela
July 9, 1816 – Argentina
July 28, 1821 – Peru
Sept. 15, 1821 - Costa Rica
Sept. 15, 1821 - El Salvador
Sept. 15, 1821 – Guatemala
Sept. 15, 1821 – Honduras
Sept. 15, 1821 – Nicaragua
May 24, 1822 – Ecuador
Sept. 7, 1822 – Brazil
August 6, 1825 – Bolivia
August 25, 1825 – Uruguay
1829 – Greece
October 4, 1830 – Belgium
1839 – Luxembourg
February 27, 1844 - Dominican Republic
July 26, 1847 – Liberia
March 17, 1861 – Italy
July 1, 1867 – Canada
January 18, 1871 – Germany
May 9, 1877 – Romania
March 3, 1878 – Bulgaria
1896 – Ethiopia
June 12, 1898 – Philippines
January 1, 1901 – Australia
May 20, 1902 – Cuba
November 3, 1903 – Panama
June 7, 1905 – Norway
Sept. 26, 1907 - New Zealand
May 31, 1910 - South Africa
November 28, 1912 – Albania
December 6, 1917 – Finland
November 11, 1918 – Poland
December 1, 1918 – Iceland
August 19, 1919 – Afghanistan
December 6, 1921 – Ireland
February 28, 1922 – Egypt
October 29, 1923 – Turkey
February 11, 1929 - Vatican City
Sept. 23, 1932 - Saudi Arabia
October 3, 1932 – Iraq
November 22, 1943 – Lebanon
August 15, 1945 - Korea, North
August 15, 1945 - Korea, South
August 17, 1945 – Indonesia
Sept. 2, 1945 – Vietnam
April 17, 1946 – Syria
May 25, 1946 – Jordan
August 14, 1947 – Pakistan
August 15, 1947 - India
January 4, 1948 – Burma
February 4, 1948 - Sri Lanka
May 14, 1948 – Israel
July 19, 1949 – Laos
August 8, 1949 - Bhutan
December 24, 1951 – Libya
November 9, 1953 – Cambodia
January 1, 1956 - Sudan
March 2, 1956 – Morocco
March 20, 1956 – Tunisia
March 6, 1957 – Ghana
August 31, 1957 – Malaysia
October 2, 1958 – Guinea
January 1, 1960 – Cameroon
April 4, 1960 – Senegal
May 27, 1960 – Togo
June 30, 1960 - Congo, Republic of the
July 1, 1960 – Somalia
July 26, 1960 – Madagascar
August 1, 1960 – Benin
August 3, 1960 – Niger
August 5, 1960 - Burkina Faso
August 7, 1960 - Cote d'Ivorie
August 11, 1960 – Chad
August 13, 1960 - Central African Republic
August 15, 1960 - Congo, Dem. Rep. of the
August 16, 1960 – Cyprus
August 17, 1960 – Gabon
Sept. 22, 1960 – Mali
October 1, 1960 – Nigeria
November 28, 1960 – Mauritania
April 27, 1961 - Sierra Leone
June 19, 1961 – Kuwait
January 1, 1962 – Samoa
July 1, 1962 – Burundi
July 1, 1962 – Rwanda
July 5, 1962 – Algeria
August 6, 1962 – Jamaica
August 31, 1962 - Trinidad and Tobago
October 9, 1962 – Uganda
December 12, 1963 – Kenya
April 26, 1964 – Tanzania
July 6, 1964 – Malawi
Sept. 21, 1964 – Malta
October 24, 1964 – Zambia
February 18, 1965 - Gambia, The
July 26, 1965 – Maldives
August 9, 1965 – Singapore
May 26, 1966 – Guyana
September 30, 1966 – Botswana
October 4, 1966 – Lesotho
November 30, 1966 – Barbados
January 31, 1968 – Nauru
March 12, 1968 – Mauritius
Sept. 6, 1968 – Swaziland
October 12, 1968 – Equatorial
June 4, 1970 – Tonga
October 10, 1970 – Fiji
March 26, 1971 – Bangladesh
August 15, 1971 – Bahrain
Sept. 3, 1971 – Qatar
November 2, 1971 - United Arab Emirates
July 10, 1973 – Bahamas
Sept. 24, 1973 - Guinea-Bissau
February 7, 1974 – Grenada
June 25, 1975 – Mozambique
July 5, 1975 - Cape Verde
July 6, 1975 – Comoros
July 12, 1975 - Sao Tome and Principe
Sept. 16, 1975 - Papua New Guinea
November 11, 1975 – Angola
November 25, 1975 – Suriname
June 29, 1976 – Seychelles
June 27, 1977 – Djibouti
July 7, 1978 - Solomon Islands
October 1, 1978 – Tuvalu
November 3, 1978 – Dominica
February 22, 1979 - Saint Lucia
July 12, 1979 – Kiribati
October 27, 1979 - Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
April 18, 1980 – Zimbabwe
July 30, 1980 – Vanuatu
January 11, 1981 - Antigua and Barbuda
Sept. 21, 1981 – Belize
Sept. 19, 1983 - Saint Kitts and Nevis
January 1, 1984 – Brunei
October 21, 1986 - Marshall Islands
November 3, 1986 - Micronesia, Federated States of
March 11, 1990 – Lithuania
March 21, 1990 – Namibia
May 22, 1990 – Yemen
April 9, 1991 – Georgia
June 25, 1991 – Croatia
June 25, 1991 – Slovenia
August 20, 1991 – Estonia
August 21, 1991 – Kyrgyzstan
August 24, 1991 – Russia
August 25, 1991 – Belarus
August 27, 1991 – Moldova
August 30, 1991 – Azerbaijan
Sept. 1, 1991 – Uzbekistan
Sept. 6, 1991 – Latvia
Sept. 8, 1991 – Macedonia
Sept. 9, 1991 – Tajikistan
Sept. 21, 1991 – Armenia
October 27, 1991 – Turkmenistan
November 24, 1991 – Ukraine
December 16, 1991 – Kazakhstan
March 3, 1992 - Bosnia and Herzegovina
January 1, 1993 - Czech Republic
January 1, 1993 – Slovakia
May 24, 1993 – Eritrea
October 1, 1994 – Palau
May 20, 2002 - East Timor
June 3, 2006 – Montenegro
June 5, 2006 – Serbia
February 17, 2008 – Kosovo
Read more!

Myths and reality behind BT affairs

The first private news paper Bhutan Times was forced to go for outsourcing to ensure its regular publication after a group of seven journalists, including its editor, resigned abruptly on October 22 afternoon saying management had undue interference on editorial issues.

The problem began shortly after enthronement of Wangcha Sangey as the new executive chief of the company already reeling under heavy debts. The resignation did bring some contrasting reactions from locals and global viewers. While onus to speak reality behind the incidence lies with the players, outsiders can only play with what has been said and seen physically.

In its editorial in the first issue after the mass resignation, the weekly indirectly blamed the journalists for failing to do their part on protecting democracy that is taking root very recently.

It is strange that private media was commissioned by the Fourth King to protect and promote democracy. Yet, the darker and more scarier side of democracy is also filtering in from the side of the media itself. It has been the dream of every Bhutanese to present a democracy that is as unique as its origin from the throne. A democracy that reflects and is hinged on our development aspirations of Gross National Happiness. This was stirred and shaken with the solidarity march which emanated mostly from people in the media.

The speakers who dared not to speak anything about democracy till some years back, alleging it to be a political form that destroys national harmony, now links everything with democracy. The editorial failed to mention how the management played role in protecting democracy while imposing its interest on editorial team. Media plays its role in democracy only when it is let to work independently, especially, letting the editorial team to decide what to write and what not. Management can suggest, not impose.

The ethnic discrimination continues to pass through Bhutanese mind despite reshuffle in the political system and adopting democracy. According to disgruntled journalists, the CEO warned the editor to realize this ‘social standing’, indirectly hinting this Nepali-origin editor to be a citizen of lesser status. In many occasion, the ruling community people term people of Nepali-origin to be migrant or from Nepal. The sore reached its peak in 1990 and is still not healed.

This group, who worked as voice of the people, became voiceless when they stepped out of the paper. None of the newspapers supported their cause of working for editorial independence. The first daily, in fact the only daily, Bhutan Today even challenged these journalists of trying to kill Bhutan Times and take up job in a new newspaper. Business Bhutan, the weekly magazine also supported the management of Bhutan Times. The way papers presented themselves has clearly paved a highway for the management to impose their interests in other media outlets as well in future. This is darker side of the free media in new democracy.

The new management of the paper showed its cruelty at the first show. From the day Sangey entered the company as CEO, he supposedly cut down tea budget for the reporters. According to him, it was necessary step to cut unnecessary expenses to bring down the losses company has been incurring. On the other side he, as chief of the board of directors of the company, increased his salary. While former CEO was given Nu 60,000 a month, this new CEO will take Nu 110,000 per month as salary. Will cost cutting measures like slashing tea budget cover this expense for CEO? The attempt of the new CEO to protect his step is questionable when it comes to relieving the company from debts. And possibly, the new CEO might have already chosen other reporters who can work in lesser budget under his command.

Right after the resignation, the Bhutan InfoComm and Media Authority (BICMA) wrote the CEO to submit the list of new journalists working with the paper with their credentials. It was a regular duty for BICMA as prescribed by law. The new CEO hired team from K4 Media, another private media company planning for a new monthly magazine shortly, to bring out the new issue of the weekly paper. The outgoing of the seven reporters and entry of K4 Media people within a few minutes time seems to be a drama already planned in advance. In other sense, Sangey had already contacted the K4 Media group to take up the job when reporters are likely to go out under force.

The reply CEO wrote to BICMA also reflects his personality as a media owner. This man has, proved worst in work history while in Royal Insurance Company of Bhutan, claimed himself to be a ‘senior citizen of 57 years with a track record of proven capabilities and established credentials’ and added the letter from the BICMA insulted his personality.

He writes,
BICMA shares the ruthless strategy of the BT News Room renegades to close down the publication of the news paper. And that you feel it is the right time to strike down Bhutan Times Newspaper which is the only news corporation independent of government or individual proprietorship influence in the the Kingdom of Bhutan. BICMA’s another stand is that the state must approve the editorial team which means the state controls the news. BICMA could do a great media sensitization service for the general public if you broadcast your vaunted “Provision of the Act” that dictates “Editorial Team” of “Free Media” must be approved by the state authority and this is legislated by a democratic parliament. I can see one silver lining for the near bankrupt Bhutan Times. Would the state pay the salaries of the state approved editorial team?

His response published in his paper instead of sending it to BICMA offices, also ironically blamed former Kuensel chief and secretary of the ministry of communication, Kinley Dorij, who rather has no links in the dispute. Sangey wrote,
Let me also state herein what you already know as a matter of historical Bhutanese media hierarchy. That the present secretary of the Ministry of Communication and Information, who is your boss, was for a long time both the CEO and the Editor-in-Chief of Kuensel Corporation. That Tenzin Rigden, the former CEO of Bhutan Times, was also executing the role of the Editor-in-Chief after Tashi P. Wangdi left Bhutan Times. In fact, the editor, Gopilal Acharya, was transferred as a regional reporter. I brought him back to do the job of the editor. Therefore, the objection of BICMA is directed against me as an individual and has nothing to do with editorial interference.

In sum, this is a bad precedence set in the budding media industry and a great instrument for management in other media outlets to impose their interest in new room, softly killing free media, in future. Management in Bhutan media comes from the bureaucracy and business circles that fostered under the absolute regime talking for years against democracy, rights, freedom of expression and trade unions. Under new face, the same people have groomed the liberal society to take advantage of their privileges otherwise provided them by closed and uneducated Bhutanese society.

Read more!

Religious Freedom in Bhutan

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

United Straates of America

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and other laws and policies contributed to the generally free practice of religion. Buddhism is the state's “spiritual heritage,” although in the southern areas many citizens openly practice Hinduism.

During the reporting period, the country completed its transition from a hereditary monarchy to a democratic, constitutional monarchy. On July 18, 2008, the Parliament formally adopted the Constitution, originally drafted in 2003 and published in 2005. The Constitution mandates that the King, the Druk Gyalpo, is the “protector of all religions” in the country.

While subtle pressure on non-Buddhists to observe the traditional Drukpa values and some limitations on constructing non-Buddhist religious buildings remained, the Government took steps to improve religious freedom in the country. There were no instances of the Government barring non-Buddhist missionaries from entering the country.

There were no reports of societal abuse or discrimination based on religious affiliation, belief, or practice. Societal pressures toward non-Buddhists were reflected in official and unofficial efforts to uphold the “spiritual heritage” (Buddhism) of the country.

There are no formal diplomatic relations between the U.S. and the Government; however, there is cordial and ongoing bilateral interaction and the U.S. Government discusses religious freedom with the Government as part of its overall policy to promote human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country has an area of 18,146 square miles and a population of 672,000, according to the 2005 census. Approximately two-thirds to three-quarters of the population practices Drukpa Kagyupa or Ningmapa Buddhism, both of which are disciplines of Mahayana Buddhism. Approximately one-quarter of the population is ethnic Nepalese and practices Hinduism. Christians, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, and nonreligious groups comprise less than one percent of the population.

Ethnic Ngalops, descendants of Tibetan immigrants, comprise the majority of the population in the western and central areas and mostly follow the Drukpa Kargyupa school.

Ethnic Sarchops, descendants of the country's probable original inhabitants, live in the East. Reportedly, some Sarchops practice Buddhism combined with elements of the Bön tradition (Animism) and Hinduism. Several Sarchops held high positions in the Government, the National Assembly, and the court system. The Government supports both Kagyupa and Ningmapa Buddhist monasteries. The royal family practices a combination of Ningmapa and Kagyupa Buddhism, and many citizens believe in the concept of “Kanyin-Zungdrel,” meaning “Kagyupa and Ningmapa as one.”

Bön, the country's animist and shamanistic belief system, revolves around the worship of nature and predates Buddhism. Although Bön priests often officiated and included Bön rituals in Buddhist festivals, very few citizens adhere exclusively to this religious group.

Hindus, mainly in the South, follow the Shaivite, Vaishnavite, Shakta, Ganapathi, Puranic, and Vedic schools. Hindu temples exist in Thimphu and southern areas, and Hindus practice their religious beliefs in small to medium-sized groups.

Christians are present throughout the country in very small numbers. There is reportedly one building dedicated to Christian worship in the South, the only area with a sufficiently large congregation to sustain a church; elsewhere, Christian families and individuals practice their religious beliefs at home. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) claimed the Government discouraged open worship by both large and small gatherings. International Christian relief organizations and Catholic Jesuit priests engaged in education and humanitarian activities.

Section II. Status of Religious Freedom
Legal/Policy Framework
The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and other laws and policies contributed to the generally free practice of religion. The Constitution was made public in 2005 and formally adopted by the National Assembly on July 18, 2008. The Constitution guarantees religious freedom as a fundamental right. It stipulates, "A Bhutanese citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. No person shall be compelled to belong to another faith by means of coercion or inducement." It also states, "no one shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, sex, language, religion, politics, or other status."
Mahayana Buddhism is the state's "spiritual heritage."

While the Constitution does not restrict the right to convert or proselytize, the Government limited this right in practice by restricting the construction of non-Buddhist religious buildings and the celebration of some non-Buddhist religious festivals.

The National Security Act (NSA) prohibits "words either spoken or written, or by other means whatsoever, that promote or attempt to promote, on grounds of religion, race, language, caste, or community, or on any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity or hatred between different religious, racial or language groups or castes and communities." Violating the NSA is punishable by up to three years' imprisonment, although it is not clear that the Government has enforced this provision of the act.

There are no laws against publishing religious material.

An annual government grant finances the country's Monastic Body of 3,500 monks. By statute, 10 seats in the 150-seat National Assembly and two seats on the 11-member Royal Advisory Council are reserved for Buddhist monks out of respect for the country's tradition of Buddhist spiritual oversight. There are no religious stipulations on the remaining seats. Many non-Buddhists work for the Government. The Special Commission for Cultural Affairs, with a Hindu priest as a member, also advises on religious matters.

The Marriage Act of 1980, as amended in 1996, addresses questions of family law such as marriage, divorce, adoption, and child custody. Traditionally, Buddhists and Hindus have resolved questions of family law according to their religion; however, this is changing as the country takes steps to strengthen its formal legal system. The country's legal system is based on customary law and Buddhist precepts.

The Government subsidized Buddhist monasteries and shrines and provided aid to approximately one-third of the kingdom's 12,000 monks. The Government committed to providing this support as a result of the 1956 land reform program, which stripped the monastic establishment of wide tracts of fertile land for redistribution among the landless.

The Government observes major Buddhist holy days as national holidays. The King declared one major Hindu festival to be a national holiday, and the royal family participated in it. NGO representatives living outside the country claimed that only Drukpa Kagyupa and Ningmapa Buddhist religious teaching was permitted in schools and that Buddhist prayer was compulsory in all government-run schools. The Government contended that there was no religious curriculum in educational institutions in the country. Buddhist teaching was permitted only in monastic schools; religious teaching was forbidden in other schools. Local NGO interlocutors confirmed that although students took part in a prayer session each morning, it was nondenominational and not compulsory.

The Government requires all citizens to wear traditional dress in certain public places such as Buddhist religious buildings, government offices, and schools, and for certain public functions and ceremonies. The law provides for a fine or imprisonment. Some citizens commented that enforcement was arbitrary and sporadic. The Government asserted that this requirement is intended to preserve the country's cultural integrity.

The Government continued issuing new national identity cards to "genuine" citizens. Human rights organizations alleged that large sections of the country's population are deemed ineligible for national identity cards. Persons holding residential permits, marriage certificate cards (those married to citizens), and time-bound certificates were not eligible to receive the new ID card. The Government also indicated that ethnic Nepalese who have family members living in refugee camps in Nepal would be eligible; however, reports suggested that this has not been implemented.

Restrictions on Religious Freedom
While there remained subtle pressure on non-Buddhists to observe the traditional Drukpa values and some limitations on constructing non-Buddhists religious buildings, the Government took steps to improve religious freedom in the country. There were no instances of the Government barring non-Buddhist missionaries from entering the country.

According to some NGOs, the teaching of Nepali and Sanskrit continues to be banned in Bhutan. The Government indicated that the teaching of any language is permitted; however, Nepali and Sanskrit are not part of the curriculum in formal schools.

Followers of religious groups other than Buddhism and Hinduism generally were free to worship in private homes, but NGOs alleged that they were prohibited from erecting religious buildings or congregating in public. Some Christian groups reported that religious meetings must be held discreetly, especially in rural areas, for fear of the authorities. They also alleged that the official government record does not allow them to note their religious affiliation as Christianity. The Government denied this.

No new buildings, including places of worship, can be constructed without government licenses. Reports by ethnic Nepalese citizens suggested that this process favored Buddhist temples over Hindu ones. The Government provided financial assistance for the construction of Buddhist temples and shrines and funding for monks and monasteries. NGOs alleged that the Government rarely granted permission to build Hindu temples; the last report of such construction was in the early 1990s, when the Government authorized the construction and renovation of Hindu temples and centers of Sanskrit and Hindu learning and provided state funds to help finance the projects. The Government argued that it was a matter of supply and demand, with demand for Buddhist temples far exceeding that for Hindu temples. The Government stated that it supported numerous Hindu temples in the South, where most Hindus reside, and provided some scholarships for Hindus to study Sanskrit in India.

Certain senior civil servants, regardless of religious identity, are required to take an oath of allegiance to the king, the country, and the people. The oath does not have religious content, but a Buddhist lama administers it. Dissidents alleged that applicants have been asked their religious identity before receiving government services.

Abuses of Religious Freedom
In the late 1980s and early 1990s many ethnic Nepalese residents, a majority of them Hindu, were forcibly expelled or voluntarily left as a result of discrimination. The Government claimed they were illegal immigrants with no right to citizenship or residency. Some of those expelled asserted the right of return. While the Government accepted that at least a few hundred have a legitimate claim to citizenship, it has not permitted them to return. Approximately 100,000 persons remained in refugee camps in Eastern Nepal. (For a more detailed discussion, see the 2008 Country Report on Human Rights Practices.) The Government resettled citizens from other parts of the country on government-owned land in the South vacated by the expelled ethnic Nepalese. Human rights groups maintained that this action prejudiced any possibility of land restoration to returning refugees. The Government contended that this was not its first resettlement program and that in the past it had resettled some ethnic Nepalese citizens from the South to other areas.

Some NGOs claimed that no Hindu temple or Christian church was allowed to be built in the country. Conversions to Christianity take place, but Christians are not allowed to openly pray or to build churches. They are restricted to practice within the confines of their homes.

Forced Religious Conversion
There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States or who had not been allowed to be returned to the United States.

Section III. Societal Abuses and Discrimination
There were no reports of societal abuses or discrimination based on religious affiliation, belief, or practice. Societal pressures toward non-Buddhists were reflected in official and unofficial efforts to uphold the "spiritual heritage" (Buddhism) of the country. While there were no reports of the repetition of the excesses of the late 1980s and early 1990s, societal pressure for conformity with Drukpa Kagyupa norms was prevalent.

Section IV. U.S. Government Policy
There are no formal diplomatic relations between the U.S. and the Government. Informal contacts between the two governments took place frequently. During these exchanges, U.S. officials discussed governmental discrimination against the ethnic Nepalese minority.

Periodically throughout the reporting period, officers from the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi discussed religious freedom with the Government in Thimphu in the context of refugee problems and the Constitution. U.S. officials stressed the importance of constitutional guarantees for religious freedom and the protection of minority populations. The officials also reiterated the importance of finding a lasting solution for the mostly Hindu refugees in Nepal in order to demonstrate the Government's commitment to religious tolerance.

The U.S. Government also worked to promote religious freedom and other democratic values by sponsoring travel of several citizens to the United States under the International Visitors, Humphrey, and Fulbright programs.

Read more!

from australia again

here are some more pics. there was deusi play much ahead of tihar and another troupe of dancers at the function

Read more!

Bhutanese Australians show their culture

the bhutanese resettled in melbourne, albury and woodanga celebrated their anniversary of being australian bhutan coinciding with dashain festival. here are some of the selected photos that my dereast brother (Mamako Choro) dinesh acharya sent me. please ennjoy them.

 

the larger face of the entire team at the show

________________________________________________________________

brother gets accompany of his dancer-cum-partner

_______________________________________________________________

my dear brother does his MC role

_______________________________________________________________

the organiser gang

_________________________________________________________________

the dancer troupe

Read more!

The quake wake

The devastating earthquake of 6.3 Richter scale on September 21 and several aftershocks have not only caused a huge physical destruction but also terrorized general public and exposed the national caliber to tackle natural disaster.

Even after two weeks of the disaster, the government is yet to make a full account of the loss and damages. And what government is preparing for adjusting with possible future disasters is unclear.

Relief supports are not well managed and people still are forced to take shelter in sheds. Thousands of the people in the eastern districts are still living outside their homes. The windstorm, torrent rainfall and the aftershocks are triggering more damages, causing obstacles to little efforts made for relief support to victims.

According to the statistics made available by the government on October 5, at least 4,595 houses, 184 government buildings and institutions, 748 cultural properties were damaged and 47 people injured.

Of these, 1446 houses, 17 government buildings, 187 cultural properties were non repairable. The figures are likely to grow as rescue teams enter deep into rural areas.

In Mongar district alone 1991 houses have been damaged, followed by Trashigang 1571 and Trashiyangtse 573 houses. Most schools and Basic Health Units (BHU) of Trashigang have been damaged. The government said it cannot estimate the cost of damages.

Government officials say, how can it be possible to value damage to stone and mortar structures, built by the villagers themselves, with one wall smashed and a deep crack running right through the other? Even more difficult to value is the damage to old monasteries and lhakhangs and sacred kus and ngangtens (inner relics). Many of them are priceless.

The donation drive for relief support continues to pour in. The office of the Gyalpoi Zimpon has received about Nu 3 million in cash from Bhutanese people and agencies, as well as a few foreigners so far. Of this, Nu 300,000 was donated by Hindu community in Thimphu. The association of graduates, Youth Voluntary, donated Nu 500,000.

Bhutan Chamber of Commerce and Industries and government employees are making arrangement for more donations. Thimphu residents have organized dance parties to raise funds. Several districts are planning cultural shows to collect cash and kind.

Royal Bhutan Army, Royal Bhutan Police and members of the Sherubtse college's social service unit (SSU) have been mobilized across the districts to carry out relief activities.

Questions have been raised whether Bhutan has the resources to start rebuilding. Earthquake damages are addition to damages of infrastructure caused by heavy rainfall in May and July.

Prime Minister Jigmi Y Thinley briefed representatives of international agencies in Bhutan and has opened his basket for financial assistances. He made attempts to ensure transparency to fund given by donors for earthquake relief support by failing to rely on his words, a team of World Bank and UN system in Thimphu has set out for tour to six eastern districts to assess the loss and estimate cost for repair. Read more!