This is a reference to recent spurt of news on mines and how agencies have failed to clarify in the minds of the people doubts about the system’s unclear, opaque and confusing buck passing.Fines have been levied and warnings made out; such stories come to light with each edition of news prints (thanks to committed works by journalists). And on the other hand we say we want to turn corruption into a high risk but low gain prospect.
Would fining such serious gaps mean we are making corruption a High Risk and Low Gain prospects for amassing quick wealth? Are warnings enough? Wouldnt these actions sent out messages to others that corruption is worth it if by paying a small fine and perservering through some warnings could fetch a good chunk of wealth (proceeds of corruption)? Most people would know that mines as natural resources belong to the entire nation and allowing them to be misused without benefitting the masses (in terms of royalties and other fees) means violating the rights of the common Bhutanese? As someone with no knowledge I can only guess that even 1 single day of activity and transaction at a mine site would translate into 1000s of Ngultrums and here we are talking of a tiny winy fine and a warning which may continue again in the future.
The example maybe of mines for now but, really the enforcement needs to be better in other fields too. Otherwise this may sent out a very very wrong message and become the source of rising corruption in Bhutan.