The role of the Opposition in a democracy cannot be understated. The Opposition not only keeps the government in check, ensuring policies are sufficiently scrutinised and debated, it also represents diverse voices, including those on the fringes of the society.
The current Opposition, Bhutan Tendrel Party, has come under public scrutiny for its perceived silence on a range of pertinent national issues. The people are questioning whether the Opposition is hand-in-glove with the government.
Perhaps, such public expectation is also arising due to the political precedent.
During the first democratic government’s term, the only two Opposition members – despite their small numbers against the overwhelming majority of the ruling party – went all out, using all means, from blogs to social media to mainstream media, to draw attention to critical issues confronting the nation. Their loud stance set a precedent for what an active Opposition should look like in Bhutanese democracy and politics. The opposition parties in subsequent terms continued this tradition.
Against this backdrop, the current Opposition’s approach appears almost uncharacteristically subdued. That is why it is perceived as mild and mellow. But nothing is farther from the truth.
At a recent press conference, the Opposition Leader made it clear that the Opposition’s role goes beyond merely opposing for the sake of opposing. Bhutan Tendrel Party hopes to ensure effective governance, supporting the government when policies benefit the nation and the people. This strategy is not about being passive but prioritising national interest over partisan politics.
The Opposition’s clarification is crucial in understanding this new dynamic. The Opposition’s role is not to contest every decision but to engage constructively with the government. The Opposition’s works also extend beyond the public eye into parliamentary committee meetings, where government and opposition members collaboratively address a range of issues. This behind-the-scenes effort is often overlooked but is integral to the legislative process and governance.
The calm and composed approach of the Opposition may seem mild but this represents a strategic shift. Democratic governance is not a zero-sum game but rather a complex interplay of contestation and cooperation. Combining critical oversight with cooperative governance only displays the opposition party’s political acumen and maturity. In fact, by fostering a co-operative political environment, the opposition might be contributing to a more mature and effective democracy.
The Opposition is redefining its role by demonstrating that the opposition does not have to be involved in relentless confrontation all the time when thoughtful, strategic engagement can achieve a lot more for the greater good of the nation. This evolution in Bhutanese politics, though less noisy, might be a sign of party politics taking a back seat and, if so, this will only fortify and deepen our democratic process.
That said, on a lighter note, for spectators and political observers, a little drama and theatrics add flavour to the political discourse. A little dose of sound and fury helps spark public enthusiasm and participation. After all, what is politics without a little bit of theatrics?