The Constitution of Bhutan equips the judiciary to foster transformative justice. The High Court (HC) and Supreme Court (SC), fortified by 10-year tenure and insulated from political volatility through stringent impeachment safeguards (Article 32), possess structural independence to deliver landmark rulings capable of redefining the nation’s legal landscape. Coupled with their constitutional mandate as guardians of justice under Article 1(11), these courts hold the authority to drive enduring societal progress in creating a just and harmonious society.
The SC and HC justices enjoy decadal tenures, ending only at age 65, unlike elected officials or other constitutional post-holders. This prolonged tenure, protected by impeachment requiring a two-thirds parliamentary majority (Article 32(2)), liberates justices from transient political pressures. Such stability cultivates judicial boldness, enabling jurists to interpret laws without fear of reprisal, particularly in cases challenging state power or societal norms. Article 21(10) empowers courts to issue writs safeguarding fundamental rights—authority reinforced by the assurance that justices need not dilute judgments to appease short-term agendas.
Globally, judicial tenure models balance independence and accountability differently. The UK’s Supreme Court justices serve until mandatory retirement at 75. Australia’s High Court justices retire at 70 with no fixed terms, while India’s Supreme Court justices serve until 65, often facing truncated terms due to delayed appointments. Bhutan’s model—fixed tenures with age ceilings—strikes a prudent equilibrium. A decade-long term allows jurists to develop expertise, while age limits prevent stagnation and insulate the judiciary from executive interference, avoiding the pitfalls of life tenure or politically vulnerable short terms.
Our justices, as constitutional guardians (Article 1(11)), hold the authority to invalidate laws conflicting with core principles (Article 1(10)). Article 21(1) mandates “enhancing access to justice,” requiring bold interpretations of due process and equality to protect marginalized groups. Using advisory opinions (Article 21(8)), justices can shape legal norms, countering state overreach and addressing modern challenges like digital privacy and climate justice. By invoking Article 21’s guarantee of “fair, independent” justice, the judiciary must dismantle discriminatory laws and integrate digital and environmental rights into precedent. This aligns with Gross National Happiness, ensuring governance evolves as a sustainable, equitable model. Such judicial stewardship is not activism but fidelity to Bhutan’s constitutional vision.
Stability of tenure empowers justices to address systemic deficiencies—procedural inconsistencies and fragmented rule-of-law frameworks—anchoring His Majesty’s Diamond Strategy. Secure tenures enable our justices to forge binding precedents under Singapore-inspired common law frameworks. Harnessing AI and blockchain can streamline justice delivery, and reforms requiring long-term, apolitical stewardship. Justices could also enhance transparency through public case databases and live-streamed hearings (Article 21(1)), mirroring democratic systems such as India, Australia, and the United States. Such measures will build public confidence and institutional credibility, aligning with Gelephu Mindfulness City’s (GMC) vision of an innovative legal framework.
Thus, our justices—empowered by constitutional mandate and decadal tenures—must decisively dismantle archaic legal ambiguities to realize His Majesty’s clarion call for transformative justice during the 117th National Day. By adopting Singapore’s precedent-driven rigour and Abu Dhabi’s tech-integrated frameworks, justices can anchor public trust (Article 21(1)) and propel Bhutan beyond tradition into a global justice paradigm. These demands align judicial innovation with GNH and sustainable development, ensuring the Diamond Strategy’s promise: a rule-of-law ecosystem. The judiciary’s role is not merely interpretive but foundational—a catalyst for governance that harmonizes heritage with 21st-century judicial reform.
Sonam Tshering Lawyer, Thimphu
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own