Unconstitutional? or Not?

Lets leave aside the Political Parties for a moment and talk about the safeguarding of Constitution. To safe guard, respect and abide by the Constitution is our fundamental duty.

I couldnot hold behind than to write about it, when people are throwing out all their thoughts about the breach of constitution. Because if there is so, we must take up a responsibility to point out and even defend it.

So it is there, DNT's pledge of going away with cutoff point for Class Ten is Unconstitutional?

Now let us get back to the real terms of our Sacred Constitution. First, lets refer the Article 9, Clause 21, ''The State shall provide free access to basic public health services in both modern and traditional medicines''. Clause 21 is interpretated  that, the state shall render free health services to people both in modern and traditional, which means people need not have to pay for basic health services. Ofcourse the Basic Thing here needs to be deliberated but in our lowest possible common sense it will be understood that, day to day sickness of our people shall be covered by the state free of cost. And so, if the health services beyond basic is being provided by the state free of cost, will it go against the constitution?

In the same way, lets now see Clause 16 of the same article, ''The State shall provide free education to all children of school going age up to tenth standard and ensure that technical and professional education is made generally available and that higher education is equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.'' So, going by this interpretation, the state shall make available free education minimum upto tenth standard. However, will the state providing free acess to education till 12th standard breach the constitution? If we go carefully with the terms, it can be understood that, state shall even provide acess to higher education beyond tenth standard on the basis of merit along with technical and professional education. This in our common knowledge shall be interpretated that, State shall by anymeans provide free education to all children upto tenth standard whereby providing a free education beyond tenth is unrestricted. However, the special mention of children shall be noted that, beyond children of school going age, may come in conflict with the Constitution. Therefore, in my best personel view DNT's pledge of getting our school going children all the way upto 12th standard or Degree if the State could afford to, will not breach the Constitution. However, free acess to education below tenth shall breach constitution. Therfore if it still feels the breach, does it mean, pursuing beyond tenth shall be rigidly based on merit at all times to come? It would also mean that education must not expand. It would also mean that states's educational infrastructure and capacity must be fixed. This literary would mean no development. If we are this way to interpret our Constitution, I must say we are trying to freeze the future evolution against the growing population and needs. We must base our line of interpretation through principles of state policy whereby the article is set to bench mark the state's actions but non restricted to over performance. It is as what we have much over 60% of the Forest Cover where the Constitution mandates the minimum requirement.

Note: I am not along with this going away with Cutoff Point but It would certainly shall not breach Constitution.

Talk of the town again is with apointment of Ministers from the same Dzonkhag. It is clearly mentioned in the constitution that maximum of only two Ministers shall be appointed from the same Dzongkhag. The appointment beyond that shall definitely come in conflict and breach the constitution. However, lets be also well aware that speaker is at the rank of cabinet ministers. Article 12, Clause 3, States that, "At the first sitting after any general election, or when necessary to fill a vacancy, the National Assembly shall elect a Speaker and a Deputy Speaker from among its members''. Therefore, going in line with this, there is no indication anywhere that the Speaker cannot be from the Dzongkhag who have already appointed two Ministers. Logically and conclusively a Dzongkhag can have Two Ministers and One Speaker (who is at par to Ministers). Look at 2008 to 2013 DPT government, Trashigang had Lyongpo Minjur Dorji, Lyonpo Wangdi Norbu and Speaker Jigme Tshulthrim. Speakers certainly would be from ruling Party who have secured more NA seats.