Still Anonymous Bhutanese Social Media Users?

Freedom House, a US based non-governmental organization (NGO) that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights, has scored Bhutan 58 out of 100 in 2020, a decline by 1 since 2019 (Freedom House 2020). Comparatively Bhutan’s immediate neighbours India and China scored 71 and 10. One key element used to score is the Civil Liberties under which Freedom of expression is measured, especially in media, religion, academics and personal views.

Even though Freedom of Expression is guaranteed by the Constitution of Bhutan, people and the media practice self-censorship. In a close-knit society of 0.7 million population living in around 38,000 sq. kms area (National Statistics Bureau 2020) where steadfastly support to the monarchy is unquestioned, questioning the authority itself is unquestionable, fearing repercussions. Also, there is the desire not to upset friends and relatives in a small society (Pem 2012).

So Bhutanese resort to Social Media, creating anonymous accounts and ‘discussing’ issues on online forums anonymously. This is considered unhealthy for a democracy, where Freedom of Expression is not free (Zam 2018). Amrit Subba, a visually impaired youth Counselor, who is also a local blogger points the rights and responsibilities as enshrined in the Constitution, when he discusses defamation in social media by anonymous accounts.

So why this shift to online anonymity in Bhutan, especially to report on corruption acts by those holding public offices? The media houses in Bhutan depend hugely on advertising from the government (Freedom House 2020), so they can’t afford to be too critical of their gift horse. Even media houses urge Bhutanese to be responsible online (KuenselOnline 2020).

Dasho Tshering Tobgay, ex-Prime Minister of Bhutan wrote about the Right to Information (RTI) which forms one of the fundamental rights of Bhutanese guaranteed under the Constitution. The RTI Bill was tabled in the upper house by a ex-MP Sangay Khandu in 2012 which unfortunately was not passed.

The Bhutanese citizens are the main stakeholders in this issue. Their desire of freedom of expression are not being fulfilled, so they go online anonymously.

But therein lies the main issue. Going anonymous online gives one a false sense of empowerment, turning lambs into lions. Speaking without fear of retaliation and judgement, people become too bold, sometimes even becoming immoral (Barton 2015).

There are numerous Facebook groups namely, Bhutanese News and Forums, Druk News & Forums, etc. which are crawled by anonymous users who post, comment and share on issues mostly related to corruption in the civil service. Since they can’t raise their voice through the ‘proper’ channel, the issues are shared online, debated, and judged. And since these groups also have members from the civil service, these ‘discussions’ also get shared on the official media forums, which ultimately gets acted upon.

Sometimes under the guise of anonymity personal vendetta are also aired online. If people use the mainstream media, they may be sued for libel, case in point of a journalist who shared a post on her personal Facebook account of a 6-year old girl being mistreated by her step-mother (Zam 2018) (CIVICUS 2018). So, just to be on the safer side, they choose to go online anonymously. You can’t be truly anonymous online (Lufkin 2017). In many countries it may be illegal to be anonymous online, if the policing agencies suspect you for being a security threat.

The latest in line is the Bhutan Information Communications and Media Act 2018, which mandated the establishment of Media Council of Bhutan in 2019. This council monitors the media and their contents in Bhutan. This is seen as a censorship to the already self-censoring media houses in Bhutan (Freedom House 2020). These root causes tighten the grip on the already suffocating media and bring a draconian rule to freedom of expression in Bhutan.

Bhutan’s transition to democracy is an example of peaceful and voluntary handover by a ruling monarchy. With the power handed over to the people, it is the civil service which seems to be holding the upper hand (The Druk Journal n.d.). But Bhutan’s highest corrupt practices are all found under civil service (KuenselOnline 2020b). There are check and balances in place, especially with the Anti-Corruption of Bhutan (ACC) and Royal Audit Authority (RAA) as constitutional bodies beyond the influence of the civil service and the executive.

But that is just in name. In a small society like Bhutan, where everybody knows everybody, it is quite difficult not to have ‘relationships’ which do come in handy. So, people wear a mask of anonymity (Pem 2012a).

In conclusion, numerous significant actions took place which contributed to the increased online anonymity in Bhutan. The Right to Information bill was not passed by the upper house in 2012. Sangay Khandu the Member of Parliament who proposed the RTI bill did not get elected in 2018. The Bhutanomics satirical website which was truly instrumental in ‘spilling the beans’ was blocked in 2013, and Tshering Tobgay’s party did not win any seats in the National Assembly in 2018.

Thus, anonymous Bhutanese social media users are here to stay for now.

The Guy Fawkes mask has become a symbol of anonymity

Reference

Barton, E 2015, The Danger of Online Anonymity, bbc.com, BBC Worklife, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20150309-the-danger-of-online-anonymity>.

CIVICUS 2018, Bhutanese Journalist Exposing Child Abuse Convicted for Defamation, monitor.civicus.org, CIVICUS - Tracking conditions for citizen action, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://monitor.civicus.org/updates/2018/09/17/bhutanese-journalist-exposing-child-abuse-convicted-defamation>.

Freedom House 2020, Bhutan, Freedom House, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://freedomhouse.org/country/bhutan/freedom-world/2020>.

Invision Community 2019, The incredible power of anonymity when growing your community, in Matt (ed.), Invision Community, viewed 19 August 2020, <https://invisioncommunity.com/news/community-management/the-incredible-power-of-anonymity-when-growing-your-community-r1123/>.

KuenselOnline 2020a, ‘Being Responsible Netizens’, Kuenselonline.com, 7 March, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://kuenselonline.com/being-responsible-netizens/>.

― 2020b, Report Finds high Prevalence of Corruption in Public Service Delivery, kuenselonline.com, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://kuenselonline.com/report-finds-high-prevalence-of-corruption-in-public-service-delivery/>.

Lufkin, B 2017, The reasons you can’t be anonymous anymore, Bbc.com, BBC Future, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170529-the-reasons-you-can-never-be-anonymous-again>.

National Statistics Bureau 2020, Bhutan at a Glance 2019, National Statistics Bureau, National Statistics Bureau, Thimphu, pp. 1–2, viewed 20 August 2020, <http://www.nsb.gov.bt/publication/files/pub1ai6514dg.pdf>.

Pem, S 2012a, Anonymous in Bhutan, Bhutanomics : The Bhutan Analytics, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://bhutanomics.com/2012/anonymous-in-bhutan/>.

― 2012b, The Anonymous Bhutanese, Bhutanomics : The Bhutan Analytics, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://bhutanomics.com/2012/the-anonymous-bhutanese/>.

Subba, AB 2018, Responsible Use of Social media: a Reminder for Anonymous Users, The Bhutanese, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://thebhutanese.bt/responsible-use-of-social-media-a-reminder-for-anonymous-users/>.

The Bhutanese 2012, Right to Information Bill to Be Introduced in Parliament by Lone MP, The Bhutanese, viewed 20 August 2020, <http://thebhutanese.bt/right-to-information-bill-to-be-introduced-in-parliament-by-lone-mp/>.

The Druk Journal n.d., The Changing Role of the Bhutanese Civil Service within the Bhutanese State, The Druk Journal, viewed 20 August 2020, <http://drukjournal.bt/the-changing-role-of-the-bhutanese-civil-service-within-the-bhutanese-state/>.

The Royal Government of Bhutan 2008, The Constitution of The Kingdom of Bhutan, Thimphu, pp. 1–75, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://www.nationalcouncil.bt/assets/uploads/docs/acts/2017/Constitution_of_Bhutan_2008.pdf>.

Tobgay, T 2012, Right to Information, Tshering Tobgay, Tshering Tobgay, viewed 20 August 2020, <http://www.tsheringtobgay.com/media/2012/right-to-information.html>.

Zam, N 2018, When Freedom of Expression Isn’t Free: Journalism, Facebook, and Censorship in Bhutan, The Diplomat, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://thediplomat.com/2018/08/when-freedom-of-expression-isnt-free-journalism-facebook-and-censorship-in-bhutan/>.

Zangpo, N 2017, What’s Unsocial about Social Media in Bhutan?, Kuenselonline.com, viewed 20 August 2020, <https://kuenselonline.com/whats-unsocial-about-social-media-in-bhutan/>.