Is “Nyamrupness” relinquishing?

The Prime Minister Dasho Dr Lotay Tshering assures the people – “Nyamrupness” is as strong as it was at the founding of the party. Constituents of various constituencies expressed that the Prime Minister did not make the wisest of decisions in this particular matter. While political observers felt it was a wise decision. As the Party President, the Prime Minister talked to his members of the parliaments and cabinet ministers for certain the appointment of ministers, then all the candidates of the party, elected and non-elected ones gave the Prime Minister the discretionary power to nominate ministers. The Prime Minister had acted on this, and thus, the decision to nominate Karma Dorji for the ministerial portfolio. According to the commotion across various social media platforms, the words are spread and it was spread by the people – people felt there was a rift and a ruckus within the party with the process of selecting candidates to the ministerial post. It was shared by Druk Nyamrup Tshogpa’s (DNT) serving members of the parliaments (MPs) that the ministerial berth should be naturally given to senior serving MPs. It was also told by the members of the parliaments that it should not be the prerogative of the founding members alone, and the appointment of Layog Lyonpo as Karma Dorji, members of the parliaments tell that Karma Dorji’s standing as one of the founding members of the party as the foremost reason why he received the ministerial berth. The MPs were also disgruntled because though a candidate was selected partly to follow regionalism, it was not done fair and square because following it would have another candidate to the ministerial post. The Prime Minister agreed that this factor counted “just a bit” while as far as capability is concerned, everyone he had considered for the post – and he said he considered almost everyone eligible - had a “competitive edge”. It was also shared that the members of the parliaments and council of ministers, and also those disgruntled members of the parliaments that they respect the decision of the party president. Democratic institutions and practice depend on trust, in two ways. Citizens must trust each other to abide by shared rules and norms that together govern a political setting; it is a feature of democratic states that they direct their resources not to enforcement of rule abidingness, but rather towards providing collective and public goods. As people poured grievances against the party president’s decision, people must trust the guiding political representative, who via their election are granted discretion to make decisions that will have significant impact on the lives of thousands. The Prime Minister, also DNT’s party president, the Prime Minister never used the discretionary powers arbitrarily, and it was not only spelt out through speaking to DNT’s members, it was also a decision that was taken over those sleepless nights. If the discretionary power was used arbitrarily, there is every chance that it may threaten to undermine the trust relations between citizens and their representatives, and therefore the efficient and effective running of democratic states. In Bhutan, the trust that underpins the decisions of the elected representatives, there has always been overwhelming respect and acceptance, there was also overwhelming support. With two years to unfurl, the people of Bhutan can wait to witness the capability of those nominated candidates to the ministerial berth.