Regular Irregularities

November 15, 2016: I visited Yangchenphug Higher Secondary School (YHSS) as a Visiting Examiner (VE) for the Board Examination Secondary Physics (Year 12) Practical Examination officially for 3 days. I evaluated 123 science students’ (Physics) project entries on the first day. The physics practical exam was administered over the course of the final 2 days. To prevent questions from being tampered with or declassified, schools across the nation start and end the practical examinations on the same day. However, due to the large class sizes at YHSS, we commenced the practical tests for the first cohort of students at 5:30 AM in the cold winter morning to strictly end it uniformly with other schools. I do not recollect precisely when I departed for home after the first day’s tests which wrapped up at 7:30 PM.

Although the modalities of administering the practical exams emerge to have been customised recently, at the time I served as VE, grade 12 science students were primarily oriented to the same set of questions. For this reason, the first cohorts who completed the practical exam in the morning were required to remain segregated inside the allocated room until the other fellow students complete the test. VEs are mandated to function as watchmen to keep the students confined to the closed-off room. VEs must even accompany students visiting the restroom to limit students' communication with the acquaintance they encounter on their way to the restroom and thereby defend against the accidental or intentional release of the exam questions.

I discharged my duties as VE in accordance with the obligations declared in the Letter of Undertaking from the Bhutan Council for School Examinations and Assessment (BCSEA). On day 5, I claimed my Daily Allowance and Travel Claims (TA/DA) as permissible for all other civil servants for 5 days [3 days for practical examination duty, 1 day for travel to the examination site (YHSS), and another 1 day for return journey]. 

A few months later in the school, I was notified that I have claimed an additional amount of Nu. 500 when tasked as VE during the board practical examinations. According to the BCSEA office,under the new financial regulations, a person is only entitled to a half-day allowance for the return trip to working stations that are lesser than 70 kilometres away. This means that from the entitled daily allowance of Nu.1000 per day, I need to refund Nu. 500. This also suggests that the previously established official 70-kilometre distance between Wangdue (my place) and Thimphu (Test centre), has abruptly been shortened based on the measurements provided by the BCSEA.

A lengthy list which in the view of the BCSEA office has violated the financial regulations by claiming additional allowances of Nu. 500 has already been forwarded to the respective District Education Office. My name was publicly declared by the school administration on the school social networking platform, WeChat, pronouncing the same issue. There were also some whirlpools of unconfirmed cautions and whispers circulating around that, certain punitive administrative prosecutions may follow for those who fail to refund the amount promptly. 

I did not react to the notification instantaneously. This is because, I can recall with sufficient clarity that over the course of my last 12 years of employment, I have NEVER been ensnared in any behaviours that have culminated into a drama involving financial irregularities against my name. But learning that I have to refund Nu. 500 from the entitled allowance, I was dumbfounded and thus, revisited the distance between Wangdue and Thimphu on the financial map. The map reads 70 kilometres obviously. 

I quickly reimbursed the money that same day, choosing not to debate about the distance. As an emotionally sensitive individual, I remember being humiliated even as a small child when my name was announced in the face of others for something I had not done or because something I had done was not in violation of the law. For example, I had a horrendous psychological trauma which I still cannot forget and forgive when the principal of the school terminated me because of another student’s offence (coming soon).

But above all else, whenever there are FI, especially relating to the state money, as a citizen, I feel duty-bound to do everything to stop anyone profiteering through manipulation, mishandling, or fraud, so that we can use the funds for others, higher, and nobler causes. Even though I was aware that I had not claimed more than what I was legally entitled to, I nonetheless reimbursed the money as instructed by the BCSEA office. 

I write this opinion after getting disturbed by repeated news of FI. Before I turn to discuss the FI reported by the Royal Audit Authority (RAA), at the outset, I begin by discussing some information associated with FI. 

Image courtesy: Click LINK

What is Financial Irregularities (FI)? 

 

Whether we know it or not, we have heard about it periodically – from the mainstream media or the annual publication of the Royal Audit Authority (RAA). In almost every issue of their publication, mainstream media report snippets of stories associated with the FI. The RAA as the supreme audit institution of the Kingdom yearly takes this task to publish reports like the annual lochoe (annual religious event) which is calendared in their yearbook episode. Ironically, nobody seems to bother about these reports. Not even those avid social media icons with huge followers or public figures who are otherwise so vocal in advertising commercial merchandise when they are paid a fortune. Consequently, the FI phenomenon in our context has now easily transformed into regular irregularities.

Under a broad conception, FI includes intentional false statements or omission of data pertaining to financial operations including but not limited to: 

·      Embezzlement

·      Fraud 

·      Falsifying documents/records 

·      Mismanagement of funds  

·      Misappropriations of assets, 

·      Falsification of records or 

·      Noncompliance with laws or regulations.

·      Corruption (such as giving bribes, bid riggings)

 

Why does FI occur?   

Money is the root of all evil they say. The obsessive desire that individuals have for money is what makes it the source of all evil. More significantly, the fact that money is deployed as a universal tool to do everything in this world only serves to compound the situation by making money the root of all evil. 

But what can be done without having money these days? 

Money is not everything, we are frequently told. But I always believe that these are the thoughts of people who have amassed enough wealth. As a person who lived a life without even having a bare minimum, I do not buy such idiocy. 

For instance, at the international level, money is heavily employed as a means for a nation to dictate and demonstrate dominance, authority, and global super-power. At the government level, politics function only when there is abundant money. At the individual level, we engage with money for absolutely everything.

But do these reasons stated above cause FI? Maybe or may not. 

Whenever I hear of FI, the following things spring into my mind: 

Human Greed

Some people have unquenchable desires and longings. They do not think twice about engaging in criminal activity and breaking the law to get filthy rich and have it all for themselves, even at the expense of the national coffer.

 

Opportunity to Access 

People take advantage of the opportunity to do anything they like when they have access to public funds. They can fiddle with the calculations, bribe someone, embezzle money, or engage in corrupt practices.

 

Inefficient System

The fact that we always hear about FI signals the ineffectiveness of our check and balance system. It is not surprising that we frequently witness the same individuals and institutions indulging in FI because of the fragile system. These people are already informed of the system’s vulnerabilities, which are neither remedied nor considered to be addressed despite frequent FI incidents.

 

Toothless Laws 

We often lack robust legal action against FI culprits. Most of the time, perpetrators are given administrative action as punitive sanctions. Administrative action means transferring the wrongdoers to a new place (so-called remote posting). New places are locations with all the contemporary amenities in place. Because they receive the same monthly income with less work and responsibility, lawbreakers who are relocated to remote areas are often contented, comfortable and convenient. 

 

Who is involved in FI?   

Nobody needs a subtitle to decipher this question. Based on the evidence of mainstream media reports, FI is connected to those in positions of authority, have access to public funds, and deal with money at work. 

 

Why is FI a Big Concern for Bhutan?  

Although we emphasise on Gross National Happiness (GNH) over Gross Domestic Product (GDP), GDP is still an important constituent of GNH. Our economy is still at an embryonic stage, which requires abundant efforts to keep it emerging and evolving. When there is FI, our emerging economy will be corrupted and will be diseased to function efficiently.

We are a donor-recipient nation where most of the developmental activities are completed through bilateral aid or loaned capital. We should not be complacent to witness this gamble of financial illegitimacy contaminate and hurt our delicate economy.  

At the societal level, the recurrent incidences of FI will deteriorate the noble foundations of harmony, and tha-damtsig (commitment/trust to the relationship). If FI is not nibbed in the bud, it risks the potential in creating an unequal and illegal wealth distribution, causing disharmony and distrust in society. That’s where we will keep seeing more people having plenty of money to support three to four generations of their families, while others even lack a basic roof to keep them safe from the heat and cold. That’s how the bridge between haves and have-nots will only get widened. 

Curbing FI

I am not an economist or financial expert. But I certainly feel that for a very small nation like ours, we can fix everything. Although FI cannot be eliminated, there are mechanisms to mitigate it. 

Annually RMA publishes the findings regarding the FI. It is now time that they remedy the identified vulnerabilities in our system. When regular FI are reported annually like an Olympics event, at times, we can only sense that we are already in auto-pilot mode. FI has been the elephant in the room. Some people and organisations have already earned a permanent seat in this financial Olympic event due to their ritualistic engagement.

Curbing FI is a collective responsibility. It is time to hold people accountable if they are engaged in any FI-related practices. It is time to introduce zero tolerance into action. It is time to revamp our system and make it more robust, transparent, and dynamic.

At the individual level, it is time that we school our attitude. For instance, I reimbursed the money despite being aware that I had not claimed any more money than what was legally entitled. I refunded the cash immediately, even though I understood the cashier was to blame in the first place. I am mindful that working with ethics, professionalism, high morals, and integrity are key ingredients to any human behaviour.  

Data Democratisation

I was fortunate to have an audience with His Majesty the King after I completed the Young Professional Leadership Program (YPLP-6) from the Royal Institute for Governance and Strategic Studies (RIGSS), Phuentsholing, Bhutan in 2018.

RIGSS is a premiere institute founded by His Majesty the King in 2013 to promote excellence in leadership, governance, and strategic studies. His Majesty the King places a paramount significance by granting an audience to all the cohorts at the end of their graduation. 

Audience with His Majesty the King

One of the key concerns articulated during His Majesty’s address was regarding Data Democratisation – making information accessible for all the people. I draw my perspectives in praise of His Majesty’s wisdom that offers profound relevance about data democratisation in operationalising our system – precisely education. 

As a former classroom teacher, I understand the importance of fully installed and operational data democratisation in our education system. Annually or bi-annually or sometimes even more frequently than that, teachers submit student-related information to the School Management, who then forward it to the District Education Office and subsequently to the head office in the Ministry of Education. Teachers are asked to submit the same data to the same office several times, yet it is not accessible when needed for a variety of reasons.

 

What is Data Democratisation?   

Data democratisation is the process by which an organisation makes data accessible to all people (e.g., employees, stakeholders). Briefly, data is any piece of information that can include a range of simple (e.g., working email address; employee details; precise location of office) to complex (e.g., records of the training attended by the all the employees of the organisation) materials that we can gather regarding the institutions, organisations, or associations. Since data is ubiquitous, at its core, data democratisation is all about making “access to data”. 

Giving access to data is equivalent to granting privilege for everyone the possibility to obtain the information. In this sense, data democratisation embodies the core of democracy by facilitating access to information. Data democratisation in short can be seen as a type of data democracy.

Courtesy: Prime Minister's Office - PMO, Bhutan

Why Data Democratisation?   

With changing times and emergent technologies, we must evolve how we process things. There is virtually no time for anyone to go through a tedious process to collect small pieces of information that may be otherwise secured by sitting in a given area. For example, it is inconvenient for the citizens of Eastern Bhutan to travel to Thimphu, the capital city, to acquire specific data and process everything that may be obtained from their own stations. Data democratisation is thus an efficient means of saving money and time for those in need by making the work more convenient and quicker to execute – simply by giving access to the data. 

When everyone has access to data, no gatekeepers who otherwise create barriers at the data’s access point are required. For example, when we visit the district education office, Administrative Assistants who work under education officials do not have the autonomy to offer access to some of our personal records since the password, key, or internal rules do not allow it. Data democratisation has the potential to break that impasse by allowing anybody, at any time, to access data with no restrictions. Empowering data to employees boosts the sense of engagement and ownership of taking their roles more accountable. 

Data access is crucial for facilitating digital transformation and increasing efficiency. When data is open and accessible, it can improve transparency. Transparency promotes trust and confidence. These days, with mobile devices in everyone’s hands, data democratisation will encourage society to become more data-informed and make data-driven decisions.

 

But, What About Sensitive Data?  

Although data democratisation is inherently good, it does present several issues regarding data ethics, data breaches, and accountability. Some data may contain legal implications that make it unlawful to be open and transparent. In such a situation, we must learn how to share data ethically. There must be a system of checks and balances to make the data accessible - both to the provider and the recipient. Otherwise, data democratisation would frequently be tarnished by limitations such as potential data misuse or data security concerns (e.g., private or classified documents).

To begin with, it is not even reasonable to make sensitive material (e.g., data related to legal operations or that may entail risks to national sovereignty) publicly available and online. However, it would be helpful to provide a remark or procedures for obtaining those data or information. Another approach is to provide some working references/links to the relevant offices' websites or contact information. People in desperate need can pick that option and receive the data they require.

 

How to Improve Data Democratisation?  

Any organization’s growth trajectory has a substantial impact on the rate at which data democratisation unfolds. I keep emphasising that let alone data democratisation, everything is achievable for a tiny nation like ours, with fewer people and manageable data.

We must overhaul the current dynamics of running offices and organisations that are mostly siloed and fragmented.  Practically STOP operating in silos in the first place. Reduce the cumbersome bureaucratic process we have to undergo in order to avail any public service. When it comes to working, most institutions have their own territories. Some offices are so compartmentalised that bosses cannot be reached to obtain data, even if the supervisor/head shares the same building. Our offices that deal with similar data need to collaborate and undertake some initiatives to increase data availability. For example, the police traffic division can work with the RSTA to provide access to driving information at any time, unless there are certain legal constraints.

We boast about going electronic and digital to deliver public services, but we do not have a systematic process or a credible source to access the data. In the case of education, for example, let alone our schools, some important offices under the Ministry’s head office do not have functional and up-to-date websites that offer access to critical data. Our addresses are often out of date, residences are not visibly numbered, and roads connecting to some offices are not adequately signposted. All these parameters contribute to data democratisation.

We hear about lavishly financed conferences/seminars/meetings being held in some of the country's most expensive resorts to address some of the nation's pressing issues. However, the information that is relevant to some of these meetings appears undocumented and inaccessible. Most of the information produced is in the form of hard copies stored in the managers’ offices for auditing or dust collection. We rarely consider the long-term usage and references of data.

This dilemma will be quite familiar if we are academic scholars. Other than certain social media posts in which people mention the title of the workshop/course/training and upload images of themselves eating, drinking, or trekking, it is unusually difficult to research relevant literature in our context that is formally documented and archived. Consequently, from an academic standpoint, I argue that the lake of our literature is ridiculously insignificant and awfully dehydrated.

TANSTAAFL

Nothing in life is truly free, and the phrase There ain't no such thing as a free lunch – often abbreviated as TANSTAAFL – emphasises this idea. Even things that appear to be free have a price.

In economics, TANSTAAFL is largely deciphered in the light of opportunity costs. Opportunity costs in lay language can be understood in a context where, in every decision we make, there is another alternative which is not considered but would have also produced some value or usefulness. 

The reach and scope of TANSTAAFL’s influences are infinite. Even in our daily lives, the idea of TANSTAAFL can play a key role in making informed choices by taking into account both direct and indirect costs. 

I connect the idea of TANSTAAFL with the recent public outcry generated by the news of charging Nu 10 per person for entering and exiting the pedestrian terminal. While some citizens endorsed the idea, others remain opposed to being obliged to pay the user fee. There is also a faction of people who derided such government undertakings in social media. However, the good thing is that the people who transit through the pedestrian terminal desire a system that handles user fees in a transparent approach. Currently, there is no receipt of payment being done. 

This is one of the potential reasons why, even after operating the system of levying the user fee, we can still hear the undying public outrage loudly. 

Pedestrian Terminal in Phuentsholing: Image Source Click the image

Why Public Outcry 

We have been conditioned to receive everything for free or at affordable prices from the government, which is one of the main triggers of the recent drama regarding the levying of user fees for using the pedestrian terminal. For instance, we already have free healthcare and education. Still, at one time, there was a rush to convert schools in our locality to central schools because, in central schools, everything was provided free by the government. Nobody, not even the affluent, powerful and financially capable, was ever reluctant or shy away from reaping the benefits and advantages of getting free from the government. We are still living with this tumour of mentality that prevents us from contributing even a small part of our effort, in this case, to use government-installed facilities for our own advantage. We feel the real pinch when we are paying for it out of our pockets. But on the other hand, we do not mind spending Nu 20 for 4 pieces of imported doma products or at worst, one million for one decimal of land in Thimphu. Who cares? 

The user fees paid for using the pedestrian terminal is only a nominal fee of Ngultrum 10. Although the recent public outcry is not exclusively about the amount of the user fee, it is about the installation of a transparent system that manages the money collected as a user fee. I concur with the individuals who have voiced this because they have every right to be concerned about how their hard-earned money is spent. According to the media, people are least bothered to pay the user fee that is levied for the purpose of facility operation and sustenance. All that they desire is a regulated system that can methodically oversee the funds that are amassed from them. By raising awareness among the relevant stakeholders about the vulnerabilities and risks in the current fee collection practice, the general public is making a useful noise. Even if the money is not currently being mismanaged, the hands handling it may likely get dirtied. 

The recent outrage also serves as a litmus test for the relevant organisations and stakeholders to maintain the public's faith in their ability to acknowledge and welcome their constructive criticisms. The degree to which people are confident that this system will function as intended will depend on whether implementing agencies execute it in conformity with public favour or do away with it. Valuing the voice of the public can certainly influence initiating similar initiatives because, in the end, it is the public who will use the service.

Why Pedestrian Terminal? 

Thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic it has offered us multiple valuable lessons on how to survive collectively as a nation. When borders were sealed, imports were banned, GDP plummeted low and reliable donors dwindled, but adverse situations loomed in the society, we eventually learned to seriously put an effort for our survival.

We are gradually self-actualising that many things need to be in order and function systematically for a nation to survive. One critical challenge that faces Bhutan is a porous border that is increasingly posing a threat due to the rising number of smugglers. We heard adequate reports of people smuggling goods even during the lockdown period of COVID-19. With the pedestrian terminal that can control the movement of people from one point, it will also serve to systematise things - although it might take some time and pose inconveniences in the beginning. 

With the pedestrian terminal, unlawful behaviours taking place across the borders can be kept at bay. Imported goods can be taxed fairly. Immigration laws can be applied more professionally and methodically.

Overall, a modest thing like the pedestrian terminal can be a useful strategy for securing economic and security independence for a small kingdom like ours that does not depend on and has a standing military to safeguard the sovereignty of the state. 

Digital Payment    

The installation of the pedestrian terminal has been met with public praise. All we need to do is arrange the elements so that the system functions properly. The public’s prime concern is having a transparent system for collecting the user fee. One approach to do this is by installing a Digital Payment system.   

Although installing digital payment or Electronic Payment Systems (EPS) may come with a price, they are revolutionary in the way they make consumers’ lives more convenient and comfortable. EPS need not require the consumers to bring the exact amount as announced because it accepts even smaller amounts or denominations. Cash can be electronically transferred in a snap at the same spot. This will lessen the volume of people who queue to use the service and shorten their waiting time. Ultimately, there can be only a sizable crowd at the terminal.

With EPS, the payment receipt can be generated automatically – which can be used as a ticket for both travellers and people on duty to assess user activity. EPS is robust and secure because people do not need to handle cash. The cash can be directly transferred to a specific account maintained by the government. When the world is going cashless, it is reasonable for us to dream of having a facility that can transmit money electronically.

Even if the installation of the EPS is expensive, the government must begin investing in it. Phuentsholing is the largest commercial hub in Bhutan, and more than thousands of people transact through the gate. More people moving also means that fund generation is possible and the investment made to purchase the machine can be easily acquired besides sustaining the facilities. Other relevant measures to enable quick electronic money transfers will ensue when the government operationalises such programmes. For instance, the banks in the country can implement to offer such service to enable electronic payments by debit, credit, or any other charge cards. The present payment system through mBoB (Bank of Bhutan), MPay (Bhutan National Bank), TPay (Tashi Bank), BDBL, and Druk PNB is incredibly slow and occasionally unstable even though it is still developing. 

EPS will be a clean procedure above all else. No one gets to touch money. Even if a person is not tempted to misuse the money all alone with the current practice of collection, we can never be certain whether they would do it by colluding with other people. Money is often the drive behind persons attracted to corrupt behaviour. It is only prudent to find solutions to prevent such problems from happening in the first place. A cashless culture can contribute to the fight against corruption, and we may start hearing fewer stories of embezzlement, misuse of funds, and fraud which has unfortunately turned epidemic even within our fragile economy. 

Another virtue of electronic transfer is the direct deposit of money into the government account. No further effort or hiring of a person is required to deposit the money if EPS is used. When the cash is timely deposited, it will help in generating and accumulating interest. 

When such facilities are instituted, our population will undoubtedly use them. For instance, despite the late adoption of mobile and internet services in Bhutan, even the older generations today can adapt to emerging technologies (e.g., using social media to attend religious discourse). This is amazing because it shows how quickly our people can adjust to both technology and time. All that matters is the facilities we provide to them. With such a modest beginning, there is a scope to proliferate a technology-driven economy. People will start using services that are reliable, easy, and very fast. Nowadays, people search for methods that complete tasks more quickly when they need any services. There is literally no time for anyone to wait so long for simple tasks that may be completed quickly elsewhere. 

Revisiting the Royal Visions 

As citizens, it is our fundamental duty to assist the government in any way so that we can continue to exist as a nation. It is time that we reflect on the following passages from His Majesty the Fourth Druk Gyalpo Jigme Singye Wangchuk's coronation speech, which he addressed in 1972 at the age of just 16: 

“As far as you, my people are concerned, you should not adopt the attitude that whatever is required to be done for your welfare will be done entirely by the government. On the contrary, a little effort on your part will be much more effective than a great deal of effort on the part of the government. If the government and people can join hands and work with determination, our people will achieve prosperity and our nation will become strong and stable…If every one of us considers ourselves Bhutanese, and think and act as one, and if we have faith in the triple gem, our glorious kingdom of Bhutan will grow from strength to strength and achieve prosperity, peace, and happiness” (Emphasis added).