The Fourth International Conference on GNH and Law at JSW Law campus this week has sparked an essential conversation about transforming Bhutan’s criminal justice system. The conference brought together international scholars and legal experts to explore “Criminal Justice for Happiness”, advocating for a shift from a punitive to a restorative criminal justice system.
Our constitutional framework, particularly through Articles 7 and 9, provides a solid foundation for restorative justice. These provisions not only guarantee rights to the accused but also mandate the state to create conditions conducive to GNH, emphasising community vitality and a harmonious society. However, the current system’s infrastructure falls short of these aspirations.
The challenges are structural and systemic. Despite laws that embrace leniency and rehabilitation, we lack sufficient rehabilitation centres, funds for skill development, and comprehensive social reintegration programmes. Even basic facilities like counselling and trauma care centres are limited to selected urban areas, leaving most of the country underserved.
Statistics from the Royal Bhutan Police reveal a troubling trend: most offenders are young people, our future citizens. This demographic reality demands a shift from punitive measures to rehabilitative approaches. The current punitive system, while seemingly effective in the short term, often breeds resentment and increases recidivism, creating a cycle of criminality that contradicts our constitutional values.
International evidence strongly supports this perspective. Countries like Norway, Denmark, and Finland, which champion restorative justice, report low crime rates and safer societies. Conversely, the United States, with the largest prison population in the world and an emphasis on punitive justice, including capital punishment and solitary confinement, continues to struggle with high crime rates. These examples provide compelling evidence that punitive approaches are not only ineffective but also counterproductive.
The economic argument for restorative justice is equally compelling. Punitive justice systems burden government resources, requiring substantial expenditure on incarceration facilities and personnel. In contrast, restorative justice, though requiring an initial allocation of resources, yields long-term societal benefits through reduced recidivism and enhanced human resource development.
For instance, our drug laws already recognise that offenders often need help rather than punishment, acknowledging that drug-related issues require holistic solutions rather than isolation and stigmatisation. This principle should extend to other areas of criminal justice, prioritising rehabilitation over retribution.
Legislative reform must prioritise societal benefits over quick punitive fixes. We need laws mandating comprehensive rehabilitation programmes with adequate funding for skill development and reintegration. Critical gaps must be addressed, particularly the severe shortage of trauma care and counselling services beyond Thimphu, to create a truly nationwide rehabilitative system.
The restorative approach aligns perfectly with our GNH philosophy and complements the vision of Gelephu Mindfulness City.
This shift acknowledges that crime impacts entire communities, demanding comprehensive solutions. While implementation challenges exist, restorative justice remains a constitutional imperative. Success requires co-ordinated efforts from all stakeholders to create a system that transforms lives rather than merely punishes offences.
Restorative justice is the necessary path forward, transforming courts into facilitators of societal harmony as a GNH nation. Legal professionals, such as prosecutors, professional jabmis, and judges, must champion this approach to realise Bhutan’s vision of a just, harmonious society. This shift will not only enhance public trust in the legal system but also contribute to the broader societal well-being that Bhutan so ardently seeks.
Sonam Tshering
Lawyer, Thimphu
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own