On the CoS issue

I simply cannot comprehend how the seasoned secretaries thought of ignoring the government and acting as if they were running the government. I understand that the 3 of them were crucial for the decision but other secretaries who were present in the CoS were equally guilty unless they can prove of their disapproval of the decision taken in the meetings, which culminated into writing to another country on behalf of the government of Bhutan.

Zhaw

If they have wronged they will be punished. But give them the benefit of doubt. They should be given the full right to make their case. Let the law take its course following due diligence. Facts must be laid bare for the nation to see what is black and white. Then based on the law of the land justified actions shall be taken no matter how long it takes.

Antonio

The situation here is not about who is guilty or who is innocent. It is about a group of unauthorized people who have exceeded their limits in writing a letter to the Govt of India as a protest. As a seasoned civil servant, they should have known the consequences,

Nandan

Right decision at the right time by the Government. There are many such issues where the elected Ministers should put their foot down. A Parallel Government is a very dangerous trend. The other Secretaries who were also instrumental in taking such undesired decision should also be asked to explain.

Pema

I believe we should hear that other side of stories from those secretaries and COS. I believe RCSC must be reviewing the matter holistically. If Secretary made mistake, they must be held accountable but i failed to understand how seasoned secretaries made such blunder.

Hope it is not politically motivated because if it is, it will de-motivate all civil servants who are already de-motivated at some level.

Dort

I would say such correspondence made on behalf of the government defending an individual who might have been involved in implicating corrupt practices is what undermines the spirit of friendship, mutual trust and understanding and close cooperation shared between the two countries. Instead of wasting time to draft such strong worded official letter to the Indian Ambassador, they should have conducted an investigation to validate the allegations or dismiss them with adequate evidences.

But instead, choosing to write a defensive letter bearing official seal seeking the stringiest legal actions against some media house over an article where the media house might have done its homework and might be in possession of incriminating evidences against the individuals mentioned only seems like a feeble attempt to cover up the entire issue on the grounds of political harmony between the two countries.

Eagle