Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert B. Cialdini Ph.D.

In this book, Robert outlines various persuasion tactics to influence human psychology. He introduces seven persuasion principles that he has tested and proven effective over time.

These principles include:

1. Weapons of influence
2. Reciprocation
3. Commitment and consistency
4. Social proof
5. Liking – the friendly thief
6. Authority – directed deference
7. Scarcity – the rule of few

This insightful book on marketing and sales is a must-read for every business person looking to enhance their sales strategies.

The Powers to Lead

Twelve Take-Aways from  the book as given in the appendix;

1. Good leadership matters. Good ¼ effective and ethical. Luck matters for success, but good leaders can help shape their luck.

2.      Almost anyone can become a leader. Leadership can be learned. It depends on nurture as well as on nature. Leadership can exist at any level, with or without formal authority. Most people are both leaders and followers. They ‘‘lead from the middle.’’

3.      Leaders help create and achieve group goals. Thus effectiveness requires both vision and interpersonal/organizational skills.

4.      Smart leaders need both soft and hard power skills: co-optive and command styles. Both transformational and transactional objectives and styles can be useful. One is not automatically better than the other.

5.      Leaders depend on and are partly shaped by followers. Some degree of soft power is necessary. Presence/magnetism is inherent in some personalities more than others, but ‘‘charisma’’ is largely bestowed by followers.

6.      Appropriate style depends on the context. There are ‘‘autocratic situations’’ and ‘‘democratic situations,’’ normal and crisis conditions, and routine and novel crises. Good diagnosis of the need for change (or not) is essential for contextual intelligence.

7.      A consultative style is more costly in terms of time, but it provides more information, creates buy-in, and empowers followers.

8.      Managers are not necessarily leaders, but effective leaders usually need both managerial and organizational skills. They create and maintain systems and institutions. Leaders are not mere deciders; they help a group decide how to decide.

9.      Leadership for crisis conditions requires advanced preparation, emotional maturity, and the ability to distinguish the roles of operational, analytical, and political work. The appropriate mix of styles and skills varies with the stage of the crisis. Experience creates tacit knowledge, but analysis also counts. A cat that sits on a hot stove will not sit there again, but it will not sit on a cold stove either.

10.  The information revolution and democratization are causing a long-term secular shift in the context of postmodern organizations–a shift along the continuum from command to co-optive style. Network organizations require a more consultative style. While sometimes stereotyped as a feminine style, both men and women face this change and need to adapt to it. Empowered followers empower leaders.

11.  Reality testing, constant information seeking, and adjusting to change are essential for good consequences, but emotional intelligence and practical knowledge are more important than pure IQ in judgment.

12.  Ethical leaders use their consciences, common moral rules, and professional standards, but conflicting values can create ‘‘dirty hands.’’ Three-dimensional ethical judgments require attention to goals, means, and consequences for those inside and outside the leader’s group. Creating identities in intergroup leadership is difficult but crucial

what are you doing with your life?

Krishnamurti is a great saint and philosopher. In his book, he talks almost everytihng about life; purose of life and how to live life. He also talks about sorrow, love, happiness, marriage, depression, meditation and so on. A book to know deeper meaning of life and purpsoe of life.

My experiments with truth

Gandhi began his life with very ordinary things. No luxury life then. From his childhood I think nobody could have imagined he would become one of the greatest freedom fighter in the history. He was a shy person who would not even have a courage to speak a word in the crowd. He became a lawyer first and then one of the greatest freedom fighters in the history. He would experiment on so many things. A hard-core vegetarian, who would not accept to take meat even if he were illed to death. He survived mostly on vegetables and fruits diet. Quite interesting to read this book about his experiments on so many truths. Some experiments worked while others failed, too .

.

Hard Truths to keep Singapore going-

Resuming the blogging after a long time with this update.Always been a college timepass back then. Somehow lost the track for alomost 6 years now. Ended 2022 with the completion of reading this book, Hard Truths to keep Singapore going by Lee Kuan Yew.

Smash and Grab

 Smash and Grab by Sunanda K Datta-Ray provides the detail historical facts of how and what led to the annexation of Sikkim by India in 1975. Both during British India rule and post independence, Sikkim was an independent kingdom and had never been  one of the princely states. During British India rule, the   only document that governed the relation between the Sikkim and British India was the 1861 treaty, which referred Sikkim as an independent country. 

Sikkim executed new treaty with the Republic of India in 1950 which superseded 1861 treaty with British India. 1950 treaty made Sikkim protectorate of India and all external affairs, defense and communication were under the control of Indian Government. The 1950 treaty granted Sikkim its internal autonomy, but that was taken away by Indian government, layer by layer. By 1973, all internal affairs of the Sikkim administration were under the control of the Indian government.

Nehru made several attempts to control the internal administration of Sikkim, especially through financing five-year plans. Chogyal wanted to promote small scale industries; Nehru wanted to promote agriculture for enabling the imposition of high tax to invoke the revolt against the Chogyal. Beggar has no choice but only to yield to the Indian government at the end.

The real Indian imperialism seemed to have started only after 1967 when Indira Gandhi took over the government from Nehru. Indira Gandhi seemed to have been not very happy with Chogyal's American consort, Hope Cook and Kazi's Belgian wife. Moreover, two ladies never came to terms. Hope Cook’s western connection and the visit of her western friends to Sikkim irked Indian government. Hope Cook’s nature of claiming Sikkim's long lost territory like Darjeeling from India also did not go well with the Indian government.

After 1967, under Indira Gandhi's reign, people of Sikkim demanded the revision of 1950 treaty to get rid of protectorate status. Through revision, people hoped for complete independence of Sikkim while India wanted more control. In the revision of treaty, Chogyal preferred to use the word 'protectorate' itself while Indira Gandhi proposed to use 'permanent association’.  The word ‘protectorate’ bears some legal status for right to self-determination under the international law, but the phrase 'permanent association' has very vague legal status in the international law. Chogyal very well knew about the legal status of protectorate state. He requested financial assistance from India like Bhutan to join UN organizations like WHO, ILO, etc. Sadly, India never heeded such request nor agreed to revise the treaty without Sikkim agreeing to use the phrase 'permanent association' in the treaty. 

India did not stop. On the 50^th birth anniversary of Chogyal in 1973, in the name of demanding written constitution and democracy, Indian representatives in Sikkim swayed demonstrations in Sikkim to revolt against Chogyal's reign. When such demonstrations went extreme, in the pretext of claiming weak internal management and to restore peace and stability in Sikkim, India offered to take control of the Sikkim government.  Chogyal was forced to signed an agreement with Indian in 1973 to hand over government to restore the peace and stability. Though India said temporary hand over but that was never meant to be temporary. After the handover,  India deputed administrators in Sikkim and of all, Chief Executive was the most influential  that led the Chogyal  to yield the India’s demand.

Kazi Lhendup’s enmity with Chogyal also helped India to expand their control in Sikkim. Chogyal and Kazi never came to terms. Kazi was always against Chogyal’s rule. In 1972, Kazi openly wrote about Chogyal accusing of absolutism and corruption. Because of the fear of consequences, Kazi, and his wife absconded to Europe. Kazi was critical for 1973 Sikkim election, especially for India as he was like  an agent of the Indian government. By any means, India could not have afforded to miss Kazi in 1973 election. The Political Officer who was the Indian representative in Sikkim influenced Chogyal to pardon Kazi for his sedition charges.  Accordingly, Kazi received the royal pardon after he submitted written apology to the Chogyal.  Kazi’s party could not get majority seats in 1973 election; he made allegations of vote-rigging against the winning parties and demanded re-election. The demonstrations followed which led to the signing of the tripartite agreement between Chogyal, Political parties in Sikkim and the Indian government. The agreement provided that a responsible government would be established under the supervision of Chief Executive-Indian representative in Sikkim. In accordance with the agreement, an election was held in 1974. Kazi Lhendup's party, Sikkim National Congress won majority seats, 31 of the total 32 seats.

With Kazi’s party majority in the assembly, it was never a difficult task for India to control the assembly to pass the Government of Sikkim Act,1974.  According to the book, detail deliberation of the Act, provision by provision, never happened.  Instead, Act was passed within 15 minutes without the members comprehending the actual content of the Act, as more than 80% of the members were not well versed with English.

Chogyal refused to grant assent to the Bill. He also went to Delhi to discuss with Indira Gandhi. But his visit could not make difference as the discussion in Delhi with Indira Gandhi was not successful. Instead, people accused him of abandoning his country.  After returning to Sikkim, he was threatened with consequences if he refused to sign the bill. The author rightly described Chogyal's assent to the Bill as ‘Chogyal's death warrant’. 

One of the provisions of the Act provides that the people of Sikkim can seek participation in the political institution of India. Kazi discreetly wrote to India requesting for participation in the political institution of India without Chogyal’s knowledge. A copy of the letter that was sent to Delhi was forwarded to Chogyal only about a week later. As per Kazi's discreet request, Indira Gandhi's government proposed 35^th amendment of Indian Constitution to make Sikkim, an associate state of India and to provide two representatives from Sikkim in the Indian parliament.

Despite oppositions in the Indian Parliament, the 35th amendment was passed and Sikkim was already an associate state of India then.

The validity of the Government of Sikkim Act was questioned and challenged, and accordingly the court in Sikkim issued the injunction to stay the representation of two members from Sikkim in the Indian Parliament. The injunction proved to have been an obstruction for Indian to further their objective of smashing Sikkim. The Chief Judge who issued the injunction was lured away such a way to take leave from the office. Chief Executive knew that Chief Judge would not listen to his request; he used Chief Judge's best friend to instigate Chief Judge to take  leave from office. As expected innocent Chief Judge took leave and left to Delhi. The only independence arm of the government was brought under Chief Executive’s control.  Since then nothing was left independent. The executive branch and legislative branch were already under the Chief Executive's control.

At last moment when everything was about to get over, Kazi and his wife seemed to have realized their treachery. Crown Prince Tenzing negotiated with Kazi and reluctantly came to terms for the first time ever.  Crown Prince along with legislators in Sikkim drafted a resolution to be sent to Indira Gandhi to hand over all the roles of Chief Executive to the Chief Minister of Sikkim. India knew about the meeting, and Kazi was threatened with consequences. Kazi could not take the risk and he was immediately back to his old habit of treachery. He withdrew all propositions that were supposed to be sent to Indira Gandhi signed by legislators in Sikkim. Crown Prince Tenzing’s last hope was gone forever.

Indira Gandhi seemed to have learned a lesson from Crown Prince's attempt. Not so long after Crown Prince’s failed attempt to take over Chief Executive’s role, India with their thousands of armies smashed and grabbed Sikkim forever.  Sikkim could not retaliate with their very few guards and weapons but only left at the mercy of god helplessly losing their sovereignty forever. Even Chogyal could not do anything. India ripped off everything from him, country as well as his personal freedom. He was locked up in the palace without any communication nor any other basic utilities like telephone, water, and electricity.

Finally, the  referendum in Sikkim was held in 1975. The merger referendum was held within 72 hours with all polling booths guarded by Indian CRPS. The 36^th Amendment of Indian constitution made Sikkim, 22nd State of India. Kazi was rewarded for his loyalty to India as a first Chief minister of Sikkim.  Bepin Behari Lal who served as Chief Executive in Sikkim became the first governor of Sikkim. 

The book further provides the details facts about how Chogyal was falsely implicated for various crimes by Indian representatives in Sikkim and Kazi to destroy the loyalty towards Chogyal. The book also argues that merger was unconstitutional and illegal as Indian Law cannot bind Sikkim people and treaty cannot be amended through the amendment of the domestic law. The only way merger would have legal is through amendment of Government of Sikkim Act,1974. The another interesting part of the history of Sikkim is that when Sikkim was facing such a terrible threat to their sovereignty, Hope Cook left Chogyal and went to U.S never to be returned. She might have known that her Queen status might end soon.

 It seems democracy failed to protect the sovereignty of Sikkim. Had people of Sikkim were bit patient for their constitution and democracy, I think today Sikkim would have been another happy Himalayan Kingdom like ours. It also gives you a timeless lesson of the importance of maintaining unwavering loyalty towards our great Monarchs! Book was my best vacation treat, a great read!

2015 Year in rewind

No matter what happens, good or bad, life goes on and on.  2015 year has come to an end now. With the end of the year, it's time to realize that I have become a year older by age and in service. Most important realization of all is that I'm a year closer to my death. I would cherish 2015 year as one of the most memorable years of my life. Many important national events took place in 2015. A historic celebration of the 60th birth anniversary of our great fourth Majesty took place and His Majesty declared the news of the birth of a royal heir. Apart from national events, there are few important events that took place relating to my life. I also took few important lifelong decisions in 2015.

 It is time to revisit and check out my resolution if I had set one- how far I have lived up to my resolution and how far I have been shaped by resolution and become a changed man at the end of the year. It would have been interesting to revisit my resolution, but I don't remember I had set any resolution as such.

 I completed my probation period in the civil service and regularized my service as a regular and full- fledged civil servant. I also got married and became a husband. I worked in Thimphu District Court for about a year and from March 2015 I was transferred to Supreme Court. In the Supreme Court, I had a chance to work directly under Honorable Chief Justice. In May, I accompanied Honorable Chief Justice to Bangkok for UNEP conference. In July, I also took leave from office and went home to meet my parents. Towards the end of August 2014, I came to Washington for LLM. And lately, I have completed my first semester of LLM course.

I did not have a good start of 2015 year. On the new year eve, I had to wait in the hospital for my grandfather who was referred from Mongar Hospital. On January 1, I went to Wangdi on official tour for dividing the properties between the divorced husband and wife. When I was still in Wangdi, I heard the news of my wife’s relatives met an accident in Trongsa and  rushed back to Thimphu. Although I did not have a good beginning of 2015, but, at least, had a good end of the year without any other major problem. Thanks to Kencho Sum and everyone for making 2015 a great and memorable year!. 
At the end of the year, as a civil servant I am constantly reminded of two duties. Duty to file income tax and declare assets. I am constantly reminded of these two duties all because of my last year's failure to declare assets on time.  ACC nearly imposed me the penalty for late declaration. But my justification of being a fresh civil servant worked well to excuse my late declaration. This year, though away from home, but justification may not work every time. So, last year's failure gave me a lesson to remain constantly reminded of such duties at this time of the  year. 
 It is time to begin another new and fresh chapter of life with new hopes and aspiration. With ever committed prayer for peace, happiness and prosperity. Forget the hatred of the past, recall the past failures as a lesson for achieving success in the new year ahead. May all the misfortunes go away with 2015 year and May the new year bless us lots of luck, happiness and peace !HAPPY NEW YEAR-2016!

Life at GWU

My LL.M classmates  

  I have been in Washington almost four months now pursuing LL.M.  I have already completed my first semester and I’m confident that I have stayed long enough to make a just review of my life here as a graduate student in the George Washington University Law School. I could vividly recall my first day in Washington.  I arrived to U.S on August 27, 2015 afternoon.  It was a sleepy day all because of long hour flight and jet lag. I was already late to school by 10 days and I had to rush to school from the very next day of arrival without much rest.  I was required to  report on August 10 but all because of never ending bureaucratic hurdles I could not come on time.

 First day was never easy walking to class without any orientation or briefing. By the time I joined, other international students we re already settled and classes were already in full swing, while I had to still figure out everything step by step. I missed orientation which was actually the most important thing to familiarize the school and interact with my new classmates from different countries. Thanks to my kind host, they dropped me to school and picked me up after school for few times until I was ready to go on my own. My association with the Dean of International Students long before I joined here, made me lot easier to get into the school system. She introduced me Professors, school, classes, and many more. After weeks of struggle figuring out places, people around, and school system I adapted with the classes and the new school environment. That was when I could feel I was already a student then. 

Back in the mid of 2007 when I attended my first class in the law school, India, I found the classes quite different from Bhutan. But here the classes are even more different from India. I should say more professional and definite. The timing, syllabus, and reading requirements are already prescribed in the syllabus. We are required to read as per the syllabus and be thorough on all that concepts that will be discussed in the class. In the class, students are randomly called on to either answer the questions or to brief the cases for the class.  If we don’t read for the class and if we are called on, we are screwed.  By any means we have to read for class, no matter how bulky or long may be the pages or cases prescribed.   No wonder, we can see in every study room in the school that students are so busy reading as if like having exam next day. If we have three classes on the same day, late night reading will make you crazy.  We have to pick and choose the courses in the beginning of the semester, in such a way to avoid many classes on the same day. Otherwise whole semester will be like exam every day. Although on the same day I had maximum of two classes, nevertheless, in the beginning I had tough time reading those complicated cases. With time, I adapted with everyday reading requirement.  

Studying business law in U.S will drive you nuts. Out of my interest, amongst many other specializations available, I chose to specialize in Business and Finance law. I think I had my share of challenge and difficulties. As complicated as U.S commercial law is, I wonder if any other countries have such a complicated commercial regulations and business organizations. An approachable and friendly nature of Professors made me lot easier to digest those complicated U. S business concepts and regulations. U.S business organizations goes on partnership, Limited partnership(LP), Limited Liability Partnerships(LLP), Limited Liability Limited Partnership(LLLP), and corporations.

Generally, the students here seem quite independent and they don’t care much what others do. Unlike in Bhutan and even in India where I studied only before exam, here all students are serious in their studies and they study continuously through out the semester. On the other hand, there are students who already know about Bhutan and aspire to visit Bhutan. To many of students and people whom I met, Bhutan is known for being one of the happiest and most beautiful countries. With American students, it all depends on how far we can interact with them; they are not serious as much as they look; They are friendly and helpful too.

The international students pursue LL.M in U.S mainly for jobs in U.S.  Many of them look forward to give New York bar exam with a hope to practice in U.S. They look for jobs in U.S.  When it comes to job I don’t have to look for one, but once I thought I would try my luck in bar exam.  But even if I get through also I do not find much use to me. I won’t be working in U.S after graduation and even in future I won’t afford to come to U.S to practice law.  And moreover the bar exam has many course requirements which I thought that taking those mandatory courses will just cut off my interested courses. I gave up and decided to study what I am interested.

When it comes to exam I see their exam is more advanced and practical approach. They simply want student s to act like an American lawyer. Exams are all open book. We can use everything except human being and internet. Whether you take your notes or not, it hardly makes difference. If we are not thorough with legal principles, there is no time for us to refer notes in detail. Despite open book exam, sometimes within a limited time it’s quite hard to recollect relevant rules and write answers with comprehensive legal analysis. The best part of the exam is that we don’t have to quote any particular sections or cases. If we know the relevant principles that is worth enough to fetch some points. I never believed in reproducing accurate sections and cases in the exam. In reality we can always refer sections and cases as long as we know relevant principles and concepts. The other good part of exam here is that they give option to type or write.   

Apart from heavy classes and busy academic life, school has so many social events. They invite many eminent speakers to give lectures on different legal issues. They conduct workshops and conferences very often. In every end of such events, there will networking events with refreshments and food. We get to interact with many lawyers from different organizations and judges from different courts. As many of my international friends say, we have to balance such social events with our class. I would love to keep attending such events and meeting new people if ever we don’t have classes. With classes everyday and such events occurring every now and then, we have to somehow balance all together. 

 U.S legal system has more common law stronghold than Indian legal system. Some international students come from civil law stronghold countries and they find U.S legal system quite different from what they studied before back in their country.  For me, I have studied before in the common law country and that made me lot easier to understand U.S system.  All in all, with few ups and downs in a new place with new people and in the new environment, I had a great semester. I have already adapted with the places, system, people, and friends.  I look forward my final semester more engaging, fruitful, and relaxed.

  

Should past actions be judged with today’s standards? How far?

The only one and the same thing that RIM resembles the University from where I have graduated is about the lecture series. Here at RIM it is programmed as Eminent Speaker’s Talk Series which happens once in every month by different speakers but back in my University it used be known as ‘Guest lecture’ which happens periodically by different eminent jurists and justices from across the world over especially on legal issues. Annually depending on the quality and quantity of lectures hosted in the University, the University gets credited in its rank. As such, at RIM the second eminent speakers talk series for the month of March was happened on 14^th February, 2013 by Michael Rutland on the very relevant theme “Past is in another country and they do things differently there”. Looking to his very theme perse and the way he gave the talk it was fathomable that he seemed to advocate past is already passed and no more we can dig out the past actions no matter whether it was lawful or unlawful action. Upholding very this reason, on the backdrop of Gyelposhing Land Scam Case he asked to the audience, should past action be judged with today’s standards? But How far?. Seeing this question, abruptly many would comment either we cannot judge past actions or morally it is mistaken to judge past action with today’s standards. But let’s analyze legally and see how far it goes!

Since the time immemorial our Bhutanese society has been always ruled by law be it written or unwritten and as such there was no anarchy prevailing at any point of time. Until we have formal codification of laws we were always ruled by our religious beliefs which had the force of law imbibed in such belief especially the force of natural law. By 1980s we already had penal laws in placed wherein all penal offences were specifically defined, and the time, where we did not have codified laws that define penal offences and ruled by general unwritten laws particularly religious beliefs was gone. Given such fact in 1980s, the instant issue is whether the act committed by Gyelposhing land allotment committees was in violation of penal laws or in violation of administrative procedures? Generally no act is criminal unless punishable by law. No, doubt we had penal laws that time in the Thrimzhung Chhenmo, but were they violated the same then? If they had violated Thrimzhung Chhenmo then their act is punishable no matter how many years passed since the commission of such unlawful Act.

In the civil case there is equity principle called doctrine of Laches which is equitable equivalent to Statues of limitation which provides time barred litigations. Statues of limitation barred the plaintiff to claims his rights if he does not make in time stipulated in the Statue. Similarly the Doctrine of laches is based on the maxim that “equity aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights” (Black's Law Dictionary). The doctrine does not allow plaintiff to enforce his claim if a long delay in asserting the such right or claim has prejudiced the adverse party. However, unlike statutes of limitations which clearly specifies the time limit, doctrine of laches leaves it up to the court to determine, based on the unique facts of the case, whether a plaintiff has waited too long to seek relief. However, in Bhutan still we don’t have limitation act for waiving such right of plaintiff and until such time we have Limitation Act even for civil litigation the plaintiff can always claim his right irrespective of time elapsed but it should be subject to doctrine of Laches that it should not prejudice the adverse party by virtue of his undue delay in seeking the claim.

In the criminal jurisprudence there is no such concept called time barred prosecution or time limitation for prosecution and neither doctrine of laches is applicable. The only time limitation we have in our Civil and Criminal Procedure Code 2001 regarding prosecution is regarding the production of accused within 24 hours if the arrest was without the warrant. There is no time limit for prosecution after the commission of crime. Only few countries have time limitation for prosecution particularly in minor crimes but for heinous crimes like murder, rape, etc there is no time limitation for prosecution. Even international crimes like genocide, war crimes, crime against humanity, etc are not subject to any statue of limitation.  Unlike in civil litigation, in criminal prosecution if there is undue delay in prosecution, such delay would not be attributed to prosecutors’ fault or investigating agencies’ fault but such delay would be because of delay in knowing such commission of offence. No way would the person who committed the crime turn in himself and as a result to know such facts it takes time and the prosecution can be initiated only as and when such commission of offence comes to their knowledge through media or through individual complaints. Unlike in civil case where the fault for undue delay in claiming the right lies with plaintiff, in criminal prosecution undue delay cannot be attributed neither to prosecution agencies nor to the victim.

Further, there is no way the delay will prejudiced the  accused rather if it is left without prosecution it will affect the society for such person will repeat such commission of offence.  And also, there is no way that if such commission of crime is left without prosecution or unpunished for it has passed so many years since the commission of crime, that the accused would have learned the lesson or reformed himself on his own accord, rather such accused would repeat the commission of offence. Therefore, irrespective of amount of time (decades or centuries) elapsed since the commission of act and if such act was the punishable act at that time, it should be brought to justice, as and when such knowledge of commission comes to the fore or on the complaint of victim or any other person, for the reasons aforementioned.

The next issue is whether the past actions can be judge with today’s standards or laws? The Penal laws prevailing at the time of allotment of Gyelposhing land was Thrimzhung Chhenmo and only from 2004 the Bhutan Penal Code came into force. In 1980s we did not have separate Act that deals with corruption offences, all we had was Thrimzhung Cheenmo for all criminal and civil laws both procedure as well as substantive laws. Unlike today where we have Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2011 which defines all corruption offences and empowers the commission to investigate  all corruption related offences, back then until 2006 since there was no separation of corruption offenses from other offenses, all investigations were done by Royal Bhutan Police. The investigation of corruption offenses were taken over by Anti Corruption Commission only from 2006 onwards but from 2011 onwards Anti-Corruption Commission Act,2011 did not expressly stipulates whether Anti-Corruption Commission can investigate corruption offences that was committed before  2011 other than the investigation going on under 2006 Act? With regard to investigation going on under Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2006 but not completed when 2011 Act came into force, 2011 Act expressly empowers the Commission to continue investigation under the 2006 Act as if in force. As to the power of ACC to investigate the offence committed before 2011 Act came into force, despite there is legal presumption that laws always have prospective application I agree with the High Court of Bhutan’s finding in the Gyelposhing Land Case that unlike substantive law, the procedural law will have retrospective application given that it will not prejudice the rights of the parties. The Gyelposhing land allotment committee members were not judged whether their act was criminal or not based on present law, the Penal Code of Bhutan or ACC Act, 2011, but they were judged based on the penal laws prevailing at that time. The only present law that applied to them was procedure part of ACC Act, 2011. If there was no ACC in place also another investigating agencies would have investigated and never let of scot free without bringing them to justice as when they committed such crime there was already existing law that criminalizes such acts. They would have been let off scot free only if there was no existing penal laws at that time that criminalizes such acts as the maxim Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali[ no crime (can be committed), no punishment (can be imposed)  without a previous penal law]  clearly states that nothing is crime unless there is previous penal law existing at the time of commission of such act.

Further, no way was ex post facto law applied to them. It was not applicable to them also. Ex post facto law means ‘law after  fact’  which means law that punished person for some prior act  that, at the time it was committed, was not illegal. Expost post facto law cannot be applied to any person as in some countries it prohibit such application of laws by their constitution itself. Our constitution does not provide such provision but nevertheless we cannot apply such laws as it will prejudice the rights of parties. In Gyelposhing land case also court did not apply and it was not relevant at all as their act was not charged under ACC Act, 2011.  More over their act was not legal when they committed, there was law which criminalizes such act and hence their act was illegal when they committed.

There is legal presumption that laws always have prospective application and also ex post facto laws cannot be applied but since all laws are enacted and passed through parliament, the parliament has plenary power to legislate on everything in anyway they like as long as its within the ambit of constitution. They can make the laws that have retrospective effect also. So whether the past actions can be judged with today’s standards can be also depend on who sets those standards as they have plenary power to set such standards. The parliament had power to change the application date of ACC Act 2011 any way they like without leaving any ambiguity but they did not do it because of which when there is no express provision in the Act on such matter the judiciary was compelled to invoke its discretion to interpret such law as per canons of interpretation which the judiciary rightly and justly interpreted such ambiguity of ACC Act, 2011. Therefore, no matter how long past after doing things differently in another country , if those things were against the law, the long arms and bright eyes of the law would not leave without bringing such acts to justice