![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
In 2008 Bhutan inaugurated a written constitution thereby instituting the state as a constitutional monarchy. The constitution is almost unanimously described as democratic by international media and academics. The ease with which this apparent consensus on its democratic character has been achieved, however, raises the important question of how best to approach the theory of constitutional democratization. In approaching the issue of democratization as a move towards popular control, this article discusses the ambivalence of the Bhutanese constitution towards this principle in a cultural context where social order is seen as constituted within the unity of king, country, and people. Curiously, this language is not as unique to Bhutan as one might expect, but influenced by the Westminster legacy in its emphasis on the principle of “Crown in Parliament”, its ritualization, and ideas of political inequality. It raises the question whether this model is suitable as a blueprint model for countries with different historic and cultural trajectories from the European ones? The article advocates a novel approach to the analysis of constitutional transition that transgresses the dichotomy between an institutional and linguistic approach, thus opening up interesting new insights on the waxing and waning of processes of expanding popular control.
Notes on contributor
Winnie Bothe is a post doc. at Lund University. She is a scholar of political science, occupied with issues of state and citizenship formation in Sikkim and Bhutan.
Notes
1. “Bhutan Starts Drafting a Written Constitution,” Kuensel, 30 November 2001.
2. “Bhutan Unveils New Constitution,” BBC, 27 March 2005.
3. Bhutan is ranked partly free and rated 4.5 in overall freedom on a scale from 1 to 7. Freedom House, “Freedom In the World: Bhutan.”
4. World Bank, Country Partnership Strategy, 2.
5. Turner, Chuki, and Tshering, “Democratization by Decree, Bhutan,” 184.
6. Madden, “Not for Export.”
7. Beetham, Democracy and Human Rights, 4.
8. Bagehot, The English Constitution.
9. Madden, “Not for Export,” 10.
10. Malagodi, “Drafting of Nepal's Constitution,” 37; Madden, “Not for Export,” 10; Munslow, “Why Has the Westminster Model Failed,” 218; Sartori, “Constitutionalism,” 853.
11. One hundred and sixty interviews at rural sites and 37 interviews with the urban elite were conducted during a seven-month fieldwork in Bhutan in 2005, and 30 interviews from Bhutan in 2013. In addition, the analysis is based on the transitional discourse, investigated through the reading of newspapers and conversations with academics inside and outside Bhutan.
12. Lowdes, “Institutionalism,” 90, 98.
13. Dahl, Polyarchy, 8.
14. Mathou, Traditional Buddhist Monarchy; Sinpeng, “Democracy from Above”; Gallenkamp, “Democracy in Bhutan.”
15. Turner, Chuki, and Tshering, “Democratization by Decree,” 184; Whitecross, “The King's Gift”.
16. Foucault, “Power and Norms,” 59.
17. Foucault, Two Lectures, 121.
18. Admittedly this is Foucault in a very “light” version.
19. Bagehot, The English Constitution, 7.
20. Beetham, Democracy and Human Rights, 6.
21. Rousseau, On the Social Contract, 141; Mill, “On Liberty”, 63.
22. Whitecross, “The King's Gift.”
23. Turner, Chuki, and Tshering, “Democratization by Decree,” 184.
24. Ibid.
25. Conversation, November 2012.
26. Hutt, “Nepal and Bhutan in 2005,” 123.
27. In comparison to the original treaty of 1949 – Article 2 – Bhutan is no longer “guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations,” but “shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests.”
28. See Hutt, Unbecoming Citizens; Sinha, Himalayan Kingdom Bhutan.
29. Dargey, An Introduction to Values Education, 39.
30. Phuntsho, “Echoes of Ancient Ethos,” 358.
31. Law of Bhutan, Thrimshung Chenpo, National Security Act of 1992.
32. Bothe, “The Monarch's Gift,” 27, 38. For similar observations, see Whitecross, “The King's Gift”; and Crosette, Close to Heaven.
33. “Draft Constitution to be Distributed to all Bhutanese,” Kuensel, 23 March 2005.
34. Chief Justice, Tobgye, “The Making of the Constitution.”
35. Malagodi, “Drafting of Nepal's Constitution,” 66–8.
36. Royal assent to legislation of the Crown is clearly inscribed in the Danish (art. 12), Norwegian (arts 77–79), the Spanish (title IV), and the Dutch constitution (art. 87).
37. Bagehot, The English Constitution, 20.
38. Ibid.
39. “Bhutan Starts Drafting a Written Constitution,” Kuensel, 30 November 2001.
40. Bothe, “The Monarch's Gift,” 27.
41. “The First Draft of the Constitution Submitted to His Majesty,” Kuensel, 13 December 2002.
42. The following link to the present Bhutanese and the English Parliament durign the reign of King James the 1 well illustrates the normative idea of King in Parliament: James I (center, 1566–1625), Parliament in session in the reign of King James I (ruled England 1603–1625) http://www.superstock.com/preview.asp?image=4048-407&imagex=73&id=12069650&productType=3&pageStart=0&pageEnd=100&pixperpage=100&hitCount=393&filterForCat=&filterForFotog= and The Bhutanese King in his golden throne in Parliament. http://www.kuenselonline.com/a-calm-and-reflective-denouement/#.UcGMZvYbtxg
43. TsaThrim, art. 1 §1. Constitution of Bhutan.
44. Whitecross, “Separating Religion and Politics.”
45. “Queen and Church of England,” Web.archive.org/web/200803070003413/www.royalinsight.gov.uk/output/Page4708.asp.
46. TsaThrim, art. 1§4.
47. Ibid., 1§13.
48. Ibid., art. 35§3.
49. Ibid., art. 11§11.
50. Ibid., art. 2 §16; art. 28 §1.
51. Ibid., art. 33 § 1–3.
52. Ibid., art 2 §16 (e)
53. Ibid., art. 2 §18.
55. Arts 127 and 27 § 3 of the 1990 constitution. See Noorani, “King Gyanendra”; Malagodi, Drafting of Nepal's Constitution, 76.
56. “Politicians Unite Under His Majesty the King,” Kuensel, 5 April 2008.
57. “LG Elections,” Kuensel, 11 September 2010.
58. Although the floor is open for multi-party competition in the initial election, only two parties can compete for the parliament in the final stage (art. 15 § 5).
59. TsaThrim, art. 7.
61. TsaThrim, art. 2 §16 (a).
62. Lam and Tenzing, Driglam Namzhag.
63. Bothe, “Forming Local Citizens in Bhutan,” 412.
64. Hobsbawm and Ranger, The Invention of Tradition, 10.
65. TsaThrim, art. 10 §6.
66. Rigzin, “Traditional Bhutanese Welcome Ceremony,” 52.
67. RGoB, Election Act Kingdom Bhutan, 196.
68. Sithey, Democracy in Bhutan, 27, 181.
69. Whitecross, “Separating Religion and Politics.”
70. “Kasko Set Tone for the Discourse,” Kuensel, 20 June 2012.
72. “His Majesty Graces Closing Session,” Kuensel, 20 February 2014.
73. Sithey, Democracy in Bhutan, 71.
74. “Kasko Set Tone for the Discourse,” Kuensel, 20 June 2012.
75. “The 15 Ball Submission is in the EBC Court,” Kuensel, 23 July 2013.
76. Sithey, Democracy in Bhutan, 172.
77. Sithey, Democracy in Bhutan, 26.
78. Bagehot, The English Constitution.
79. Bothe, “Forming Local Citizens in Bhutan,” 366.
80. Bagehot, The English Constitution, 20.
81. Turner, Chuki, and Tshering, “Democratization by Decree, Bhutan,” 184.
82. “The Constitution: A Grave Responsibility,” Kuensel, 22 June 2005.
83. Interview with elite respondent, March 2009.
84. Female, 48 years, Trashigang, interviewed November 2013.
85. Expert, UNDP in Bhutan, interviewed December 2010; EU, Election Observation Mission, “Bhutan, Final Report.”
86. Turner, Chuki, and Tshering, “Democratization by Decree, Bhutan,” 190–4.
87. Female, 32 years, Southern Bhutan, interviewed November 2013.
88. Male, 60 Years, Khugonpa, Knaglund, Trashigang, interviewed November 2013.
89. Interview, male, 40 years, Gangtok, May 2013.
90. “In the Interest of Democracy,” Kuensel, 26 July 2009.
91. Bagehot, The English Constitution.
92. “Why I Voted for the PDP,” Bhutanomics, 15 June 2013.
93. Bothe, “Forming Local Citizens in Bhutan,” 202, 290.
94. “A Campaign of Terror as Election Day Approaches,” Kuensel, 19 March 2008.
95. Foucault, “Power and Norms,” 59, 66.
96. Sartori, “Constitutionalism,” 853.