When Bhutan’s King Jigme Singye Wanchuck announced in 2001 that he would introducxe a democratic constitution by 2005 and end autocratic monarchical rule, expectations were high that he would also reconsider the brutal policy of ethnic cleansing and let the Nepali-speaking people of southern Bhutan participate in governance — the right they enjoyed under the reigns of his father and grandfather, equally undemocratic but not inhumane. However, all efforts to convince the king to take the right path by the Bhutanese refugees living in Nepal and India and as well as the international community went unheeded. Not only did the king ignore expectations of the people but also put up a charade to fool the international

community by declaring his abdication and enthronement of his Oxford-educated son in his stead.

The accession of a young and educated king to the Bhutanese throne spawned high hopes that an enlightened person like Jigme Kheshar Namgyel would usher in genuine transformation from absolutism to open society. But the people have not had to wait for long before coming to the realisation that the so-called high education does not change the entrenched feudal mindset of the institution of monarchy, that hardly had any respect for the fundamental rights and freedoms of its citizens. It reminds one of James Fish who was not ironically called “the wisest fool of Christendom”.

However, the king’s declaration to hold parliamentary election and thus broaden the path towards democratisation had been welcomed, though with caution, by the international community. But the Bhutanese political parties,except the two royalist parties, either banned or exiled by the Druk regime, had been much more sceptical. The warning of the people of Bhutan and the international community went unheeded and hopes for democracy in Bhutan have been virtually dashed. In spite of a constitution that greatly limited people’s rights and genuine democratic institutions, the rulers and politicians of countries near and far voiced encouraging words in praise of the Bhutanese king for his ostensible display of fake generosity.

A general election was held on March 24 in which only two political parties were permitted to participate. But the polls have not changed at all the fate of forcibly evicted Bhutanese people living in foreign countries as refugees for more than 18 years, and brutal suppression of human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the country continues unabated and with complete impunity. The democratic countries, instead of putting pressure on the Bhutanese king to respect the Bhutanese people’s right to return to their homeland, have instead come out in support of the proposal to resettle them among totally alien populations in other parts of the world. It was a mockery of human rights to tolerate the violation of the fundamental right of the people of Bhutan. The king and his coterie were given more importance than the hundred of thousands of ordinary human beings who have been languishing in a state of utter neglect and deprivation thanks to the regime’s lopsided policies.

The height of the comedy put up by the Bhutanese authorities to dupe the international community has been the congratulation received by the Bhutanese king from government heads and politicians of the United States, Europe and India. An election in which only two royalist parties were permitted to take part was monitored by 42 observers from India, the European Union and the US. One could as well have unhesitatingly declared that an election during the Soviet era in Russia or in other “people’s democracies” in which 90 per cent of voters used to participate was also an exercise in democracy.

The so-called election in Bhutan and the support it has received will further reinforce the process of ethnic cleansing and gross violation of fundamental rights of the people. This will divide the population of Bhutan and subject them into meek submission and extremism and the country will be an open breeding ground for human rights abuses and terrorist activities. It is high time for those who are genuinely concerned about rooting out terrorism and promoting human rights in the kingdom of Bhutan to put pressure on the Bhutanese authorities to broaden the base of democracy. This can only be done by granting people the fundamental right to association and political parties to conduct peaceful protests to transform the federal set-up into an open and free society.

There is little justification in recognising a fake election in which the candidates have no right to express their opinions freely and have to fear prosecution if they do not toe the government’s line. The Bhutanese king should also realise, particularly in light of his education from such a hallowed place of learning, that a 21st century king in Bhutan must act in accordance with the norms set by the 21st century monarchs elsewhere.

Upadhyay is ex-foreign minister