WEA-RLC Research and Analysis Report

December 13, 2010

Bhutan, a tiny Buddhist kingdom in the Himalayas in South Asia, will soon have a
law providing for imprisonment of three years for  ¢â‚¬Å“proselytization. ¢â‚¬  Last week,
the parliament of Bhutan approved inclusion of a new provision in the Penal Code
to ban religious conversions by force or allurement  ¢â‚¬“ emulation of the
 ¢â‚¬Å“anti-conversion ¢â‚¬  laws in force in some Indian states. While some provisions in
the amendment bill are yet to be discussed in a joint-session of Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s
bicameral parliament  ¢â‚¬“ the National Council and the National Assembly  ¢â‚¬“ the
 ¢â‚¬Å“proselytization ¢â‚¬  clause has been endorsed by both houses, local newspapers say.
Another significant development is expected in Bhutan, which was one of the
world ¢â‚¬â„¢s most isolated nations until recent years. The government may soon give
legal status to Christianity, which has existed as an underground movement,
especially among the Lhotshampas (as the ethnic Nepalese from south Bhutan are
called), for the last few decades. It is estimated that 6,000 of the 700,000
people in Bhutan are Christian. The government has indicated that the country ¢â‚¬â„¢s
religious organizations ¢â‚¬â„¢ regulatory authority is contemplating registration of a
Christian federation. While the move may be aimed at bringing Christians under
the government regulation, it will have some benefits, too. Christians will have
to be allowed to build churches, start printing of the Bible and other Christian
literature, open Christian book stores, and so on.

The subtext of these two simultaneous developments reflects the predicament of
Bhutan, which had its first democratic elections and became a constitutional
monarchy two years ago. Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s king and political leaders seemingly want to
give rights to its people, but fear that doing so may sacrifice their country ¢â‚¬â„¢s
two key interests, i.e. preservation of its distinct culture and maintenance of
law and order. In relation to religious freedom, Christianity can be allowed to
co-exist with Buddhism only if its adherents remain culturally compliant and
maintain public order.

The Constitution of Bhutan, an absolute monarchy for around 100 years until
2008, provides for religious freedom, but it also mandates the government and
its institutions to protect Buddhism, the country ¢â‚¬â„¢s  ¢â‚¬Å“spiritual heritage ¢â‚¬  and
author of its unique culture. While in most democracies religious freedom is
subject to public order and morality, in Bhutan it is subordinate also to
protection and preservation of culture.

The stress on preservation of religion and culture in Bhutan is for both
religious and political reasons.

In Bhutan, Vajrayana Buddhism is practised. It is part of the Mahayana
denomination, one of the two broad classifications of the religion, apart from
Hinayana or Theravada Buddhism. Globally, the Theravada sect is in majority. And
Vajrayana Buddhism is seen as an  ¢â‚¬Å“endangered ¢â‚¬  sect by its adherents. So the
political and religious leaders of Bhutan are expected to protect and preserve
their religious heritage.

Additionally  ¢â‚¬“ and more importantly  ¢â‚¬“ Bhutan needs to protect Buddhism for
geopolitical reasons.

It is a  ¢â‚¬Å“tiny nation between two giants, India and China, ¢â‚¬  as Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s political
leaders often describe their fear. They also take pride in the fact that their
ancestors did not allow the nation to be colonized by outsiders, and they
believe that Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s religion and culture protected its sovereignty.

Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s fourth king, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, famously explained the reason
behind the stress on preservation of religion and culture in Bhutan.  ¢â‚¬Å“Being a
small country, we do not have economic power. We do not have military muscle. We
cannot play a dominant international role, because of our small size and
population and because we are a landlocked country. The only factor we can fall
back on … which can strengthen Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s sovereignty and our different identity
is the unique culture we have. ¢â‚¬  In other words, Bhutan needs to be visibly
different in culture from its neighbours, India and China, to assert its
sovereignty.

This is why until today Bhutan has preserved its distinct, uniform culture. All
the buildings in the country conform to the signature Bhutanese architecture and
the Bhutanese citizens are required to wear the national dress  ¢â‚¬“ knee-length
robes, known as the /gho/, for men, and the ankle-length /kira/ for women  ¢â‚¬“ at
work and at public functions.

The use of distinct culture as the guardian of the nation ¢â‚¬â„¢s sovereignty is also
reflected in the clubbing of home and culture as one ministry. Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s minister
in-charge of national security is also responsible for the preservation of culture.
Given that Bhutan perceives a constant threat to its sovereignty, its leaders
fear that even a minor law and order problem or any people ¢â‚¬â„¢s movement can be
exploited by a foreign force. This is why authorities in Bhutan have not allowed
labor unions or pressure groups or political activism.

The  ¢â‚¬Å“invasion ¢â‚¬  of two neighboring Buddhist nations, Sikkim and Tibet, by outside
forces cemented Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s suspicion. While China gained control over Tibet in
1950, India incorporated Sikkim, a Buddhist kingdom, in 1975. Bhutan alone
remained untouched. But the nation ¢â‚¬â„¢s leaders did not take it for granted. They
intensified cultural unification through the  ¢â‚¬Å“One Nation, One People ¢â‚¬  programme
in the late 1970s.

The unification exercise involved the use of one language, Dzongkha, in
education, apart from other measures. But Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s ethnic Nepalese population,
mostly Hindu, rebelled against the kingdom, which over-reacted and used brutal
force to quell their protests compelling around 100,000 ethnic Nepalese to seek
refuge in Nepal. Many of them are still in refugee camps in Jhapa in Nepal  ¢â‚¬“ a
monument to Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s violation of human rights.

The government of Bhutan needs to be apprised that a nation that is driven by
gross national happiness must not practise repression.

Studies have shown that the enactment of anti-conversion laws in India has
resulted in communal violence rather than preventing it. The possibility of the
misuse of the anti-conversion provision in Bhutan is also high because the Hindu
rightwing /Vishwa Hindu Parishad/ (based in India) is planning to open a chapter
 ¢â‚¬“ though under a different name  ¢â‚¬“ in Bhutan. Given that a majority of Christians
in Bhutan are ethnic Nepalese, the VHP will create frictions between Nepalese
Hindus and Nepalese Christians. Therefore, the government of Bhutan will need to
ensure that any such attempt is nipped in the bud.

Also, incidents like the recent sentencing of a Christian man, Prem Singh
Gurung, from Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s Sarpang District to three-year imprisonment for showing a
Jesus film will harm Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s otherwise good international reputation. (Since
Gurung ¢â‚¬â„¢s conviction for  ¢â‚¬Å“attempting to promote civil unrest ¢â‚¬  was seemingly
frivolous, an appeal in a higher court could have reversed the order  ¢â‚¬“ but it
had to be done within 10 days after the judgment was passed, as per the Civil
and Criminal Procedure Code of Bhutan.)

Being a landlocked, mountainous nation, Bhutan (India ¢â‚¬â„¢s former protectorate)
depends on aid from New Delhi, which competes with China for influence in South
Asia. Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s leaders privately admit that they are weary of their dependence
on India. And, quietly, they are striving for economic independence and to
establish ties with Western nations.

Gradually, Bhutan is gaining self-confidence. For example, in April 2010, it
hosted a South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Summit.
Besides, Prime Minister Lyonchen Jigme Thinley is often on official visits
abroad or hosting foreign delegates in Thimphu.

Bhutan ¢â‚¬â„¢s king and political leaders are generally known for being simple and
sincere  ¢â‚¬“ which sets them apart from their counterparts in other South Asian
nations. So true to their reputation, they should be asked to provide religious
and other freedoms to all the people of their country and explained why there is
little reason to continue to feel anxious about their sovereignty.

—————-

The World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) Religious Liberty Commission (RLC) sponsors
this WEA-RLC Research & Analysis Report to help individuals and groups pray for
and act on religious liberty issues around the world. This report was researched
and written by Fernando Perez, and moderated by the WEA-RLC Executive Director,
Godfrey Yogaraja. It can be used for distribution or publication with
attribution to WEA-RLC.