Where art and forensics meet!

Congratulations to Karen Mintz, a friend from New Jersey, whom I met while she was working on her documentary on Bhutan's transition to Democracy (not released yet).

Karen is working on an amazing story about a sculptor whose work led to a greater good - helping identify homicidal victims as well as finding their killers. Karen told me about him when we traveled together to Vermont for the launching of GNH/USA.  I have a great interest in forensics and the story of Mr. Bender's work is extremely fascinating to me and look forward to seeing the documentary. Great work Karen. Hope this will inspire people/artists in other countries to do the same. It is also a great tribute to Mr. Bender.

Read the story here in the New York Times.

The Neglect of Fatherless Children by the Government

I was very glad to see that Kuensel followed up on its earlier report on Fatherless children - and problems that their single mothers faced while trying to register them as citizens.

I hope that the government will take immediate action to rectify their policies and the process so that Bhutanese women no longer have to suffer such indignities imposed on them by men and the legislators.

I also hope that the media will keep this issue on the forefront and that women's organizations will take it up if nothing gets done.

+ (But to comment on the Home Minister's quote that they are "working on" availing Birth Certificates for those fatherless children, I don't think they have to work very hard if they simply streamline the process - No Bhutanese woman should have to prove the identity of the man who fathered her child. It (Citizenship) should come  automatically by virtue of the fact that one parent is a citizen. 


Just suppose that a man is left with a newborn baby whose mother dies in child-birth and they can't locate her papers. Would the child get citizenship? I would think so. It is a birth right and a human right and it is a SHAME that women are subjected to this. I wonder how long this "working on" will take while fatherless children wait to go to school avail a decent life!

Falling between the census cracks Children born out of wedlock remain out of the mainstream 5 March, 2010 - The recent annual census registration across the country left a 27-year old woman in Zobel gewog, Pemagatshel, perplexed. Her attempt at having her three children registered with the national census failed this year, like the many attempts she made in the past four years.  She is clueless about the fathers of her children.  But the name and citizenship identity card of the father is a must for census. There are about seven children in Zobel alone this year, between the ages of 1 to 14, who are unable to register in the census, gewog officials said.  “We’re helpless until the mother provides details of the biological father,” Zobel gup Dorji Wangdi said. The 27-year old mother had also filed a court case some time in 2008 for her eldest child, who is now 4 years old, alleging a man and his son as the child’s father.  DNA test results later proved that they were not the father.  Sarpang court had dealt with a similar case in 2007, where the DNA test against an alleged father also came out negative. While home ministry officials are still collecting statistics of children in the country unable to register in census because of a missing parent, there were more than 200 cases of fatherless children in Zhemgang in 2008 and at least three such cases in Kanglung gewog, Trashigang. One of the tshogpas in Trong gewog, Zhemgang, said they finally registered 54 children in the 2009 census, but nine children were left out because their mothers failed to trace their fathers.  “Although we’ve listed the details of just these nine children, there are about 20 children in the gewog without paternal details,” he said.    Gewog officials in Pemagatsel said the culture of night hunting had aggravated the situation of fatherless children in the country.  A census officer said that most women said the father to be either civil servants, who came on official tour, drivers, businessmen, students, contractors or farmers.  “There were also instances where the mother did not want to reveal the child’s father, because their relationship might be categorised as incestuous,” he said. There are also few cases where the mother’s brother, cousin, uncle or in-laws let their names and identity cards be used as the child’s father in the census, a gewog official said.  “Some relatives help the mother with their identity cards just to put the child in school,” he said.  “We feel sorry for those children, who we believe that the fathers are bonafide Bhutanese citizens although the mother could not determine who the father was.” Home minister Lyonpo Minjur Dorji said that the ministry is studying the situation and working out a strategy to protect Bhutanese children born out of wedlock.  “We’re working on developing birth certificates because until now the census is dependent on health cards,” he said. “Health cards will become subsidiary documents.” He said that the ministry is also working on developing forms for those without paternal details. By Phuntsho Choden

Does being Vociferous mean you seek office?

Of late, perhaps because of my vociferous behavior over social media on the Tobacco Act in Bhutan, I think many people are questioning whether there is a motive behind my doing this.

Some who support the fact that I am giving voice to those who have been incarcerated (unreasonably) and sentenced to 3 years in prison, have been nicer about it. They feel there should be more officials who feel as outraged as I have about what is happening to their people and rectify the situation instead of retroactively making changes to save face.

But others think that there is a motive for why I am doing this - they think I am seeking office.

When I had an argument with a young woman in Bhutan on Facebook about the Tobacco Act a while go, she said very sarcastically something to the effect of (not exact quote)"Why don't you come here and run for office, I'll vote for you." (She was more or less indicating that I was being too passionate about this because I was seeking office or the jobs of those of whom I was criticizing). I have heard this again from others - when I get into a discussion of how disillusioned I am - that if I think I can do a better job, I should run for office.

Let me set the record straight.  I have no intention of running for anything. My background as a journalist and now more as a Citizen Media person (although both jobs do more or less the same) is to critique, analyze, record, speak up for those who can't, report, uncover truth and above all to keep the check and balance for society.  That is what I do and I intend to do it well, just as I would expect an elected official to do his job well and a legislator to make sound legislations for the wellbeing of all their citizens and not make laws that create more problems within society.

Both jobs are difficult. But some may say, it is easier to be the critic than to be sitting in an office making legislations, reading piles of documents, looking into the interests of all the citizens etc etc.  Well, if the job of an elected official or legislator is considered more difficult or a notch higher than the journalists/writer/citizen media personnel, then it seems like the perks that come with it are top notch too. Journalists/writers don't get assigned cars, secretaries; they don't get fat paychecks and other fancy paraphernalia/accessories like scarves and patangs (swords) and what have you. Heck, some writers/journalists don't even have an office (freelancers) and can barely make ends meet with their paychecks. So what is so attractive about being a journalist/activist/writer then? People (generally - there are bad apples everywhere) who pursue it are there for a cause that is as important as is the cause of the legislator or a government official - to benefit their society. But they do it in different ways and are attracted to these positions given the type of persons/ people they are.

But the risks for a journalist/ writer is definitely more. For one, the position of an official or a legislator in society is often more secure than that of a journalist or writer who is but a citizen at the mercy of the legislators/ officials (the level of security for people like us also depends on how well the justice system functions and what laws are in place to protect us)

What do we as journalists/writers/citizen media personnel/activists risk in speaking up for the right/truth? We risk a lot. Sometimes everything. We risk relationships, friendships, even our own and families wellbeing. And unfortunately as we have seen in many other countries we (or they) even risk their freedom (imprisonment) and sadly even lives.

I wonder how many legislators/ government officials are willing to risk that? So far not a single one has even taken the risk of losing face (which they wouldn't) by acknowledging that a mistake was made in the implementation of the Tobacco Act that resulted in the imprisonment of 37 or so innocent people. But we know the mentality. Forget apologizing, the stubborn attitude to ignore amending it altogether to save face by doing it retroactively through the Bhutan Narcotics Control Agency shows that they don't even have half the courage or the integrity of those who have been speaking up against it.  I would like my readers to tell me who they think has risked more in this situation?

Frankly, if that is the stuff that legislators/parliamentarians are made up off I wonder what makes people think that the position to be one is so appealing? If they can prove  that there is more to the rank, the scarf, and the paycheck maybe it will inspire more people, not only to believe in them, but also to be like them.

I am content and passionate about what I do (even though it pays little or nothing) and like I said, I intend to do it well come what may. It would be good if others, who think that I have a motive, could feel the same passion about their jobs and do the same.

Losing Perspective of Who is in Priority

I saw a Tweet this morning from a Travel Agent "Simply Bhutan" that said - Health workers trained to treat altitude sickness as more trekkers venture out into the high mountains http://ow.ly/5eDdG #Bhutan #treks.

Well, its good that health workers are now being trained for altitude sickness and it is good that tourists will not have to worry that there are a lack of local health workers who don't know otherwise.

But I was saddened to read Kuensel's article that this was being done ONLY with an emphasis because tourists were suffering. So this reaction (to train health workers) is coming only after Foreigners were suffering?

It looks like this training was not prompted by the death of our own citizens - the Thorthomi Glacier workers - who died as a result of a lack of these basic services while on the job.

This is the post I wrote last year after reading about the death of those workers in Business Bhutan. It was sad to read that the Health Department really didn't see the need to do this because of our own people. Time to shift priorities I say.

Sacrificial Lambs? Rightly so as Business Bhutan says

Posted by sonam ongmo at Sunday, September 12, 2010 

This is very sad indeed. (Read Business Bhutan's story)Three dedicated workers die from lack of knowledge of the conditions they are working in (altitude sickness) and negligence (or lets say lack of care) on the part of the government/Department that sends them on these missions.

(picture courtesy Business Bhutan)

In many instances it is not outright negligence but really ignorance of the working conditions and environment. However, in this case, it should be something that is known. Given that many people have died while on work or field trips to remote villages or sites it should be something that people who are involved in this kind of work should be educated about.

Although it is said in the story that pamphlets were given to the workers, it should be known that this is not enough.  Because really even though a person knows that he could be hit with altitude sickness, what does he do when confronted with it? You and I may know but what about a semi-literate?

In this case it looks like the need for a small medical facility catering purely to these workers needs should be set up on site. Does it take too much to do this? The harsh reality of working conditions is hardly realized by many in Thimphu.

My prayers go out to the families of these workers and hopefully they will be memorialized. These are the people who dedicate their lives in service to their country. Although it may not seem that way; that they do this because they need the job and the money; I hope people in Thimphu realize that without them the job would not get done - in this case working on the Thorthomi glaciers that are at the risk of washing away much of Bhutanese civilization.

An audience with Her Majesty the Queen Mother Ashi Tshering Yangdon Wangchuck

The last few posts have been rather negative. Does this mean that I do not love my country? To the contrary. When you care too much you take a great deal of interest in everything/ anything that happens there and the criticism is really to right the wrongs so that our country can do better.

I know some people don't necessarily believe that, but I speak from the heart and that is the truth - ask a person who takes an interest or writes about his/her society and country. It is because they care and they want their societies/countries to do better. Their views and my views might not be subscribed to by all but we all must do the little we can to discuss the issues and help find the solutions. It may not be heeded to but we must all try. After all His Majesty the Fourth King in his vision for a better Bhutan (one moving with the times) pushed for democracy. If we continue to live as we did in the past, this is not living up to our responsibilities as Bhutanese citizens. 

So in the midst of wallowing in negativity in recent weeks (yes, part of it is the Tobacco Act) I think it came as a blessing to be reminded of the good things about Bhutan and being Bhutanese. As one of the few (or many!) Bhutanese living in New York I received an audience with Her Majesty the Queen Mother, Ashi Tshering Yangdon Wangchuck.

It once again took me back to the days of when I was a little girl in boarding school and being away from home and country. How, given our small population, there is always an ambience of belonging to one big extended family - the Bhutanese family. And despite all the ups and downs, the disagreements amongst our family members, every once in a while we are brought together by a bigger cause - that of being Bhutanese.

Last weekend this unifying factor was Her Majesty's visit to New York.  It was heart-warming and touching when she took a personal interest in all those introduced to her. It was also very moving when at the end of the evening before we did the Tashi Leybay she asked all of us to make a prayer that we would all someday meet again. And after we did the ceremonial Tashi Lebay with Her Majesty she walked around and gave each one of us a hug.

I think this is what makes Bhutan so unique and special. While the King (her son) spends much of his time walking/touring the countryside to be as close as he can to his people, and to look into their welfare, these values of humbleness and at the same time greatness, have also come from a mother who sees in it to do the same.

And with the recent announcement of His Majesty the King's approaching marriage to Ashi Jetsun Pema, let me take this opportunity to say that my wish at the Tashi Leybay, apart from us meeting again, was for the Happiness of the the Queen Mother, the King, the future Queen and our country.

Cutting Through Red Tape ~ Kuensel (Hope so!!)

Just after 2 posts about the confusion of this whole documentation process for children born to only one Bhutanese parent or to two parents but where one wants nothing to do with woman or child, it looks like Parliament is looking into it (even if it is only addressing one aspect of this case) it is a start.  Kuensel reports reveal that this problem is pervasive in the South but I would think it is big even in remote villages in eastern Bhutan where village women have no way of appealing their case. Many years ago somebody did a report (for Kuensel) about this problem in Shemgang where many kids that had been born out of wedlock were left undocumented.

I hope the media and those organizations involved in women's issues keep on top of this so that these poor women and children don't have to go begging to men or the government for this right. They should be able to access this right for their children without having to jump loops and hurdles.

And to think I had a problem. Fatherless children in limbo

And to think I had a problem.

I thought this discrepancy was something of the past but reading Kuensel's story in the year 2011 makes me shocked and sad that nothing (n-o-t-h-i-n-g) has been done about this from the time I experienced it in the 1990's.  In 1995 my first child (father is Canadian) was born in Bhutan. Since she was born in Bhutan to a Bhutanese parent (even if it was one parent, especially the mother)  I assumed that she would get citizenship automatically (naive me). 

I sent papers to be filed through the village representative the gup.  I was, however, told that if the father was a non-Bhutanese I couldn't get citizenship for her. So my child was essentially undocumented.  Since this was unheard of for my husband (having an undocumented child) we filed for Canadian papers for her. According to Canadian law (or any sane law) as long as one parent is a citizen the child automatically gets citizenship, irrespective of where they are born. Unlike Bhutanese laws which gives children born to  one parent of different citizenry no choice, other countries do.

I have been fortunate because even though my own country wouldn't give her (and my son) citizenship automatically their father's country did. (Bhutanese citizenship can be got on a "case by case" basis, an issue begging to be addressed because it is discriminatory)

I consider myself fortunate then that even though it is a hassle to travel back to my country on visas, my children at least have a country, a place they can call home for now. It breaks my heart to learn that other Bhutanese women, living in Bhutan, have not been that lucky. Their children could be born to 2 Bhutanese parents and living in Bhutan but not have Bhutanese citizenship.  What is worse about their situation is that they have to live with great uncertainty because they may not get access to education/schools, or even a job and they could be seen as being illegal in their own country. Meanwhile the women/ single mothers have all these hurdles to jump, including proving identity of the father to get their children citizenship which should be a birthright and in many ways a human right. But read the Kuensel story (below) to see how this law impacts some women.

Apart from having to deal with the cowardly men who have made them pregnant, and leave both woman and child in limbo, the least she should have to deal with is the government doing this too. Why should a woman have to prove who the father is in oder to avail citizenship for her child? What if the woman was raped? And even if she wasn't, what prevents her or her child from being a citizen? It is inhumane to put a woman through this!  

It is the Nation's responsibility; the government's responsibility to ensure citizens, especially women, this right and to make it as easy as they can for them to avail this right.  

Bhutanese society has been so progressive on many fronts. There is no stigma in society for single mothers and many have even chosen to be. But it looks like (as I mentioned before) there is a way to get around this citizenship thing if you know how - clearly those who live in the towns or who have access to officials/authority are able to do this.  It is only the illiterate village woman/women and their children who get left in limbo; overlooked by their fathers, overlooked by a system that sadly hasn't bothered to correct its ways or look into their plight even now. 

It looks like our government/ institutions are the ones with their laws/rules/acts that are always taking away or regressing what is otherwise a very progressive and tolerant society.

The case of the fugitive father

The same old sorry story of exploitation and desertion

2 June, 2011 - Nineteen-year-old Sithar Lhazom was contributing woola (compulsory labour) for some gewog developmental work when she met Jigme, a machine operator.

They met in Barkhue, Zhemgang, where he worked for the construction of Buli-Barkhue farm road in Shingkhar. She used to ferry cement from Buli to the gewog centre.

For the class two drop out, Jigme’s proposal to marry her meant an escape from the harsh village life she endures everyday and she was more than happy to accept the proposal.

Sithar Lhazom conceived and was six months pregnant when her ‘husband’ went to Reutala in Trongsa to work. “But he promised that he’d come back and take me with him,” she said.

That was in 2010.

Today, Sithar has a five-month old baby, whose census she could not register, because she does not have a marriage certificate and an identity card photocopy of the father.

Jigme, Sithar said, instead of coming back to take her, changed his mobile number and told people that he was not the father of her child.

Carrying her one-month old child, Sithar Lhazom walked for two days till Buli, and then hitched a ride to Reutala to meet him. “But when I reached there, he refused to even look at my daughter,” she said.

Sithar Lhazom returned home and her parents asked the gewog gup to mediate. In February this year, Jigme came with a few bottles of beer and Nu 500 to settle the case mutually.

When her family asked him to settle the child’s provisions, he said he didn’t have the money, but told the family that he owned a Maruti van in Wangduephodrang and that the family could keep that.

He left once again to get the maruti van and never returned.

Sithar and her family filed the case in Zhemgang dzongkhag court in February, but the court could not proceed with the case since they could not summon Jigme. “We couldn’t locate him with the address she gave us,” Zhemgang drangpon, Sonam Dorji, said.

The drangpon also said that, since it was a civil case, the court could not seek police intervention. “Even if we seek their help, they need a proper address, which is lacking in the case,” he said.

The court has decided to ask Sithar Lhazom to find Jigme’s whereabouts herself.

Meanwhile, Sithar and her family, whose two-storied house was razed to ground by fire on the night of May 21, said they needed his identity card photocopy to have the child’s census with them.

“I’m worried about the future of our granddaughter,” Sithar Lhazom’s father, Sonam Zangpo, 56, said. “Without the father’s details, we won’t be able to register her.”

Sithar’s neighbour said Jigme is from Chema village of Yalang gewog in Trashiyangtse, but he could not trace him. “Court and police should help to find him to bring justice to the mother and child,” the neighbour said.

By Tashi Dema

Bhutan's Parliament imparting the wrong values to Bhutanese Society.

Trying to stay a step ahead 

Bhutanese parliamentarians think they are staying one step ahead of the civilians while going about their jobs. But we all know that they are new in what they are doing; so are we the citizens, try as they might to step ahead. We are all in this together (trying to build our fledgling Democracy) and so one would think they would work together with us – after all it’s the people who brought many of them, who are in their very important seats, to office.

But judging from the way things have been going it looks like once the seats were secured, parliamentarians didn’t really feel/see the need to heed to the voices of the people, even if these people have been in the minority – which says all the more for their attitude towards those with dissenting views.

The first sign of our young Democracy’s teething problem was the Tobacco Act – which in many respects should have provided the perfect opportunity for those voted into office to display their capabilities as people’s representatives. Instead it was used to show their stubborn attitude, their inability to acknowledge a mistake made, and  as a result revealing their shortcomings to maturely handle the differences with the people.  As someone said it’s like the officials are suffering from amnesia; completely forgetting how they came to be in office in the first place and through their conduct teaching what voters should expect in the future.

With the wrong attitude

Apart from the Opposition Leader (and his lone counterpart) who voted against the Act from the very beginning, it was Lyonpo Yeshey Zimba and NC member Sangay Khandu (and maybe a few others) who showed some wisdom and maturity and were apologetic that the Act had resulted in this – the unnecessary imprisonment of 37 people and counting.

The rest fervently defended the Act, tooth and nail, even going so far as to accuse the people who were against it as being instigators against the peace and stability of the Nation. Who is really disturbing the peace is the big question here. Bhutan was doing fine without the government becoming a moral policeman, without imprisoning people left and right and straining our law enforcement's abilities to deal with other things. They have overlooked fire threats (It took 3 fires in the same location in Bumthang for police to suspect foul play), bomb threats (2 bombs were found in Gelephug and Phuentsholing) only to focus on who is bringing cigarettes and Baba into the country?

Even after receiving peaceful petitions for an amendment, the issue was brushed aside, and people were told it was not going to be even considered on the agenda in the National Assembly. But Legislators couldn’t run from it. The Tobacco Act dominated the opening session. Parliamentarians explained that the Act could not be amended because i) an Act had to be in effect for at least a year before it was amended or repealed ii) that there needed to be a consensus for the amendment of the Act.

Where did these rules come from? Perhaps they should have had one year of community consultation before they impetuously passed an Act that imprisons innocent people. 

Cracks were beginning to show in the unanimously passed Tobacco Act so Amend it without calling it "amending".