The Suja & Dzaw Conversation on the 20th edition of the Druk Journal around the theme, “A Just and Harmonious Society” was held on 13th November 2024 at the Jigme Singye Wangchuck School of Law in Paro. Over 90 participants, including students, faculty, and staff from the Law School and The Druk Gyalpo’s Institute, gathered for an engaging conversation, moderated by the journal editor, Dasho Kinley Dorji. Paro Thrizin and town representatives were also present.

The theme of “A Just and Harmonious Society,” reflects Bhutan’s nation-building goals inspired by Royal addresses. Dasho Kinley emphasised the Druk Journal as a platform for exploring critical societal issues like inequality, inequity, governance, and inclusivity, fostering open and reflective dialogue among participants.

Four of the 17 contributors to The Druk Journal, presented key insights from their articles, sparking thoughtful dialogue on some of Bhutan’s most pressing social challenges; Sanga Dorji (Physiotherapy and rehabilitation specialist at the National Referral Hospital), Sanjeev Mehta (Professor at the Royal Thimphu College), Kencho Pelzom (Consultant) and Dema Lham (Assistant Professor at the JSW School of Law).

Speaker One: Sanjeev Mehta presented an analysis of economic disparities in Bhutan, referencing data from the Bhutan Living Standards Survey (2022). Based on an article jointly written with Milan Thomas, he highlighted stark rural-urban income gaps and uneven growth among dzongkhags (districts), noting that per capita income in some districts was four times higher than in others. His presentation explored issues such as the uneven distribution of growth benefits, rural poverty, and income inequality, calling for balanced development policies that prioritise equity and inclusivity.

Speaker Two: Sanga Dorji highlighted the vision of creating a more inclusive society in Bhutan for individuals with diverse disabilities, focusing on three main pillars: Protect and Prevent, Empower and Promote, and Transform Society. He underscored the critical need for accessible infrastructure, such as ramps, healthcare facilities, social protection programmes, and inclusive education, to ensure that persons with disabilities are afforded equal opportunities and can lead dignified lives. Despite Bhutan’s foundation in Gross National Happiness, challenges persist in adequately supporting individuals with disabilities due to cultural stigmas and insufficient infrastructure. Sanga called for the implementation of policies that adhere to international standards, increased investment in accessible public services, and active community engagement to cultivate a culture of inclusion and respect. When making policy, Sanga talked of the need to consider diverse disabilities.

Speaker Three: Dema Lham drawing from her experiences with the Human Dignity Clinic at the JSW School of Law, addressed barriers to accessing justice in Bhutan. Amongst other barriers cited in her article, she identified high legal fees, inadequate mediator training, and social stigma as key obstacles, particularly for vulnerable populations. Dema proposed localised and culturally sensitive solutions to improve legal awareness and access, urging a focus on the unique needs of Bhutan’s rural communities.

Speaker Four: Kencho Pelzom explored Bhutan’s social hierarchy and its influence on citizen behavior, with a critique of how cultural norms and institutional practices perpetuate obedience and passivity. She dissected the informal “Dasho culture,” where the title is often used inappropriately in private and social spaces, creating a perception of hierarchy that limits free discourse and reinforces deference to authority. Kencho argued for a cultural shift to encourage open dialogue and critical thinking, essential for fostering active citizenship and strengthening democracy.

Discussions that followed delved into the bureaucratic use of titles like “Dasho” and their impact on social interactions. Kencho elaborated on how the informal overuse of the “Dasho” title has extended beyond its formal connotations, shaping behaviour in both public and private settings. For example, she noted how even informal gatherings often default to hierarchical interactions, limiting open and equitable discourse. Dasho Kinley added a humorous anecdote from his own experience, where the type of vehicle driven – a Prado or a smaller car – affected perceptions of authority and status, even influencing how others addressed or treated him. This discussion highlighted how societal hierarchies influence interactions, from daily life to institutional practices.

Sonam Tshering, Associate Dean for the JSW Law Research Center, reflected on the challenges of expressing dissenting opinions in Bhutan’s close-knit society, emphasising the tension between cultural sensitivities and the need for open dialogue. He noted that while society often perceives differing views as criticism, these perspectives should instead be seen as opportunities for constructive debate. He advocated fostering a culture where disagreements are addressed openly and respectfully, underscoring the importance of fact-based discussions to advance social justice and accountability. Moreover, he noted the trend of anonymous criticism on social media, emphasising the need for transparent, face-to-face dialogue to address societal issues effectively.

The conversation transitioned into a lively Q&A session, with audience members posing thought-provoking questions. A student participant from the Druk Gyalpo’s Institute asked, why rural areas often face higher costs despite being less affluent. Sanjeev in response explained that poor infrastructure and weak price regulation mechanisms increase transportation costs, disproportionately impacting rural populations. He also addressed the trade-off between infrastructure development and environmental preservation, emphasising the need for balanced solutions that protect the environment while improving rural livelihoods.

Another audience member challenged the validity of data showing Trashigang’s high per capita income, given its rural nature. A student participant from the Law School raised concerns about the risks of raising dissenting opinions in Bhutan’s close-knit society, where personal connections can influence opportunities. Kencho argued for distinguishing personal relationships from professional discussions and creating safe spaces for critical discourse. Sanjeev added that dissent must be evidence-based and factually supported to facilitate constructive debate without personalising issues.

The session also touched on the role of technology in addressing societal challenges. An audience member inquired about its potential to improve access to justice. Dema highlighted virtual hearings and e-litigation initiatives, noting their potential but limited adoption due to resistance and lack of awareness. Sanga pointed out that while technology has enhanced accessibility for persons with disabilities, high costs and inequities in access remain significant barriers.

In response to a question about addressing discrimination against individuals with disabilities, Sanga remarked: “As society progresses, people’s attitudes evolve. Today, we (persons with disabilities) are able to express ourselves and advocate for our rights. Personally, I do not perceive myself as being discriminated against, nor do I consider certain behaviors discriminatory.” He advised that individuals should either disregard acts of discrimination or, more effectively, strive to challenge and transform such attitudes.

The session concluded with reflections on the collective responsibility to address Bhutan’s evolving societal challenges. The panelists emphasised the importance of open dialogue, cultural adaptability, and inclusivity to build a just and harmonious society. The discussion reinforced the need for Bhutanese citizens to balance cultural traditions with progressive practices that encourage equality and active civic participation.

 Feedback on the conversation

Many attendees expressed that they gained valuable insights from the open, interactive, and inclusive nature of the discussions.

“The Druk Journal conversation on a Just and Harmonious Society was very enriching and interactive. The speakers shared diverse topics, and their discussions were very informative. The session was informal, which made the audience comfortable asking various questions. I felt that the diverse topics discussed were some of the long-standing issues in society that are rarely discussed. It was an eye-opening experience, especially concerning the laws and the legal representation requirements for different purposes. The talks were enjoyable, and I was eagerly waiting for a chance to ask questions. The questions asked by others were also pertinent, and the responses were impressive. At the end of the session, I felt very honored and fortunate to be a part of the discussion, and the knowledge gained has been invaluable.”

Tshering Lham
Teacher, Druk Gyalpo’s Institue

“It’s always an educational and informative experience that BCMD/The Druk Journal offers us.” 

Deki Lham
Paro resident

“I think that these sessions have the ability to engage young people, who seem to not be interested in our country’s situation, in fruitful discussion and also enable them to have a sense of belongingness.”

Jigme Chogyel
Class 11, Druk Gyalpo’s Institute

“The event was an enriching experience and there were many key takeaways. Personally, I am someone who would normally not take an interest in the topics discussed. However, I am now prompted to do further research on these topics as the conversation opened new doors for me and introduced a platform of new questions… The conversation was informal… it was this aspect that made this discussion even more captivating, and interactive. The audience seemed deeply engaged and asked many compelling questions. I felt that this session was able to promote viewers to take interest in reading The Druk Journal. This was an interactive and intellectual session that was colourful and had a light-hearted atmosphere throughout. I would like to encourage The Journal to conduct these sessions. Thank you for giving us this opportunity to engage in this conversation and shedding light on crucial issues that require such interactive dialogues to take place.”

Yeshey Dolma
Grade XI, Druk Gyalpo’s Institute