Sunday, January 27, 2013

A Kuensel –hyped Ugen Tsechup engineered Bhutan Times propaganda

The public of Bhutan have been the victim of an orchestrated smear campaign spear-headed by Kuensel to demonize me at the behest of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his fellow accomplices. Now the Royal Securities Exchange has joined the bandwagon.

I did not want a judicial trial let alone a public media trial about the destruction of Bhutan Times Corporation Ltd. because it involves Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji, a royal uncle whom I should respect and keep away from. But the smear campaign has gone too far. I therefore lay the facts before the public to reach their own conclusions. Please take the time to go through the OAG charges submitted to the Court; my appeals to the King, the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice; my primary rebuttal of the OAG charges; the OAG appeal to the Court withdrawing its charges and thus the dismissal of the Case. 

The public must be awaiting a response from me after Kuensel has repeatedly published articles distorting facts and engaging in character assassination at the behest of the party of four headed by Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. Well here is my response.

I was a Board Director representing the Minority Shareholders who own 17% of now defunct Bhutan Times Corporation Ltd. not a Cashier clerk who runs errands to Bank to withdraw cheques. How low Kuensel reporters stoop to serve Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and shamelessly declare that I personally withdrew Nu: 3.5 million cash from the Bank.

First it was the Royal Bhutan Police, then the Office of Attorney General and now Kuensel and Royal Securities Exchange (RSEBL) out to demonize Wangcha Sangey and glorify Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his three accomplices. The judicial trial was over on 23rd November, 2012 when the Royal Court of Justice dismissed the Case. Now a public trial has begun by the party of four in collusion with Kuensel reporters.
As I had submitted to the Office of Attorney General and the Royal Court of Justice, I would never want to be on the wrong side of the Royalty in Bhutan. But if pushed to the edge, I shall defend the dignity of a human being and the right of an honest, hardworking and responsible Bhutanese. And this I did in a Court of Law. The Attorney General realized that his Office was caught in the wrong footing and withdrew the charges based on my primary rebuttal. And the Thimphu Royal Court of Justice dismissed the case.

I understand that the legal arms of the government, the relevant executive agencies of the government and Kuensel and RSEBL’s rush to stand by Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. No Bhutanese individual, law enforcement personnel, media personnel or bureaucrat would risk doing otherwise.  When the OAG filed the Court Case and the Bench I of Thimphu Royal Court of Justice gagged me, I appealed to His Majesty the King, His Excellency the Hon’ble Prime Minister and the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Bhutan. I did not seek for self help. I asked that the rule of law be permitted to operate. That the Chief of Royal Bhutan Police and the Attorney General of Bhutan need to be restrained from being henchmen of the rich and the socially well placed Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. And the grievances of what-so-ever among Bhutanese citizens are allowed to be processed in a Court of Law, free of implied intimidation.

On behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his accomplices, the Office of Attorney General charged me of embezzlement and breach of trust based on self styled police investigation report. 
As required under the law, I submitted my defense (the primary rebuttal). I illustrated the absurdities of the charges against me and filed criminal charges against Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his 3 accomplices Tenzin Lekphell CEO of IMS, Dago Beda of Etho Metho group and Phub Zam of Yarkay group, based on irrefutable documentary evidences. I had to rely on documentary evidences because no Bhutanese would dare to come forward as witness. Moreover, two key witnesses had already been re-enrolled under the payment of the Party of four.

I submitted to the hon’ble Judge of Thimphu Royal Court of Justice that Judiciary of Bhutan could either deliver Justice or nail shut the coffin of Bhutan’s fragile democracy experience.

Most Bhutanese would be aware of the temporal clouts of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. I have no such resources. However, I have a deposit of personality merits. Through sheer diligence,      life-long discipline, honesty and personal integrity, I have carved a respectable place in the Bhutanese society. I am not a businessman and yet business society of the nation approached me publicly twice (in days gone by) to lead them. I obliged them the second time as Secretary General of Bhutan Chamber of Commerce and Industry. I am not a student of law but my legal opinions and intuitions are well regarded. I am not a student of political science but it was I who predicted in 1998 the coming of Democracy and in 2008 general election, I foresaw the impact of the educated voter influence. I am not a student of journalism but I was at one time a very successful Chairman cum CEO cum Chief Editor of a news Corporation. By profession I am a management expert in the field of tourism and hotels thanks to my 3 years undergraduate course in India and Japan where I learned the art and skills from professionals from the fields and professors at the Rikkyo University.

His Majesty the 3rd King of Bhutan granted credence to my political opinion, His Majesty the 4th King grants credence to my integrity and His Majesty the 5th King comprehends my allegiance to the Tsa-Wa-Sum. I have earned the gracious regards of His Holiness the Jhe Khenpo, His Excellency the Prime Minister and His Lordship the Chief Justice of Bhutan based on my personal traits of straight forwardness and insights and my dedicated love for the Country, the People, the Kings and the Buddha Dharma.

In October, 2009, Bhutan Times Corporation Ltd. went bankrupt when it was managed by the Promoters Group and both the Chairman and CEO resigned as after effect. The Board begged me, the only, Minority Board Director to take over the management. I took the position of Chairman cum CEO and Chief Editor. And in 9 months (October 2009-June, 2010) I turned the Corporation around and made a profit of Nu: 8.5 million after meeting all operating and management expenses. I decided to leave after the Promoters who own 83% of the Corporation agreed to take over the Corporation and refund my family investment. The decision was made in the 3rd AGM. The Shareholders at the AGM reached this decision after working out the details over 2 days of discussion (28th and 29th May, 2010). A legal document was executed and signed by all Shareholders at the AGM and witnessed by the AGM secretary, making the decision of the takeover legally binding.

Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji who is a major Promoter Shareholder took over the Chairmanship after me. He then deferred the implementation of the AGM decision. The deferment is illegal but one is powerless against such a force. However, between October, 2011 and March, 2012, Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his three Promoter accomplices, surreptitiously took over the two primary assets of the Corporation viz. 1. Bhutan Times Printing Press. 2. Bhutan Times Sunday Paper. Then the Party of four arbitrarily had shut down the Corporation on 31st March, 2012. They sacked the M.D and all corporate employees with one month notice pay and divided among themselves the remaining assets including 3 vehicles and sold what they did not need to raise fund for their new venture. The hijacking of the Corporation was complete by March, 2012. Then two months later, on 31st May, 2012, they convened a Board Meeting in the morning and an AGM in the afternoon and the Chairman declared that the Corporation had been shut down 2 months ago and the closing affairs were being managed by a stand-in management till 30th June, 2012. It was 2 months too late to protest because the Party of four had wiped out the total structure of the Corporation.

For more than 25 days starting 1st June, 2012, I poured over the records of the defunct Corporation in the one room office used by the stand-in Managing Director and his Deputy. It was clear that Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his 3 accomplices had formed a new Pvt. Company from the ashes of the Corporation they had burned down. True to their declarations recorded in the past Board Meetings “profit was not a priority”, and the Bhutan Times Sunday Paper must be made a, “political paper”, they had accomplished their goal under the guise of IMS management.

IMS and the people behind it have formed a political party registered as Druk Nyamrup Tshogpa. They have their political paper to voice their propaganda and a Printing Press to produce their campaign materials. However, I cannot be made to fund their political ambition.

I have been apolitical. I felt that it would be enough for a Bhutanese to exercise faith in the Blessings of the Deities, the grace of the Dharma and the wisdom of the Kings, to lead a peaceful quiet life. On that belief, my family did not cast vote in the first General Election. The 3rd King was incredible and in the 4th King we have the greatest visionary leader and as for the 5th, His Majesty has in his royal veins the blood of both Wangchuck dynasty and the Shabdrung. Therefore, I have had genuine factual reasons to feel safe and secure for generations to come. But the antics of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his hold over RBP, OAG, Kuensel and now RSEBL have cast doubts in my faith.

Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji, Tenzin Lekphell, Dago Beda and Phub Zam who represent the 41 original owners of Bhutan Times (Pvt.) company before it was floated as a public corporation, have re-taken over and made it a Private Company. The details are in my primary rebuttal to the Royal Court of Justice. Read it in the following posts. Bhutan Times Corporation Ltd. has been reverted back to its original status of Bhutan Times (Pvt.) company since 31st March, 2012.

The investment of my family has been refunded as per the unanimous decision of Shareholders in the 3rd AGM. Now they need to refund the investment of Nu: 4.06 million that belongs to the 250 Minority Shareholders who had bought the Shares when it was publicly floated. The defunct Corporation then must be de-registered as a public entity by the Company Registrar and automatically it will be delisted from the Stock Exchange.

At this juncture, it is necessary to question this recent public gimmick of Royal Securities Exchange to suspend trading of Bhutan Times Shares on the purported reason that my family investment of Nu: 2.7 million was refunded (as per the unanimous decision of the Shareholders in the AGM). Why was the Share trading not suspended in February, 2012, when the Nu: 4 million Share of Tenzin Rigden was taken over by the Corporation? Was the CEO of RSEBL on extraordinary leave then? And now is he joining the Druk Nyamrup Tshogpa and is demonizing Wangcha Sangey a required pre-requisite credential for him to earn a party ticket.

I repeat that I never wanted this issue to be a subject of public conjecture but this orchestrated demonization has crossed its limits. There is no need to demonize any character because it is said that the only way to deal with the Devil is to be a demon in nature. When devils take over, demons will sprout. I do not think that this nation should be heading in that direction. May the Triple Gyem save us!

OAG charges submitted to the Court on 5th October, 2012

My primary rebuttal of OAG charges submitted on 12th November, 2012

The Hon’ble Dasho Drangpon
Royal Court of Justice
Thimphu Dzongkhag                                                                                       Dated: 12 Nov. 2012

Your Honour,                                                                                      

Sub: The fabricated allegations of Attorney General

May it please Your Honour,

The Office of Attorney General has filed a case against me on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and Tenzin Lekphell under the Anti-Corruption Act 68(I) and 68 (II). I find the allegations, made in their petition dated 5/10/2012, most absurd.

I request the Royal Court of Justice to examine the validity of the Case filed, since the OAG is in breach of both Legal mandate and due procedural process.

A. I. The OAG is in breach of its mandate under OAG Act. It is supposed to represent the Government not private citizens.
II. The OAG filed a Case under Anti-Corruption Law without having it routed through the Anti-Corruption Commission. If RBP or OAG had deemed the Case to be of a corruption in nature, then they are required to follow the due process under established procedures that have been put in place by the Nation. The complaint of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his colleague should have been re-directed to the Constitutional Body that deals with Corruption.

Both OAG and RBP know that it is not a Corruption Case. So the two Institutions did not involve Anti-Corruption Commission. Instead they colluded to fabricate the allegations and file a Court Case just to garner favour with the very influential Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji.

B. The OAG alleges that ‘without consulting anyone’, I had kept Nu: 27,94,698 out of the total sum of Nu: 35,00,000. The OAG’s use of the phrase ‘without consulting anyone’ is a breach of legal ethic by the highest Legal Agency of the Government. Therefore, it is an act of ‘perjury’ that warrants appropriate penalty from the Royal Court of Justice.

I firmly and unequivocally deny the allegations framed against me by the OAG in its petition dated 5th Oct. 2012 submitted to the Royal Court of Justice, Thimphu. The baseless allegations and out of jurisdiction Case of OAG needs to be dealt with the contempt it deserves and dismissed.

As a response to this OAG fabricated allegation, I have this to say to the Attorney General in the words that he would comprehend because he had recently used the same to respond to Anti-Corruption Commission. There is no legal basis to pursue this matter through the Court because the facts of the Case do not correspond to the legal provision cited by the one who has become also the personal Attorney General of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji, to attach criminal sanction.

The Attorney General seems to be in the habit of misusing his official post to garner favour with big shots. In doing so he does not seem to be mindful of the harm his action is causing to the sacred Royal Institution. For example:

For the 1st time in public knowledge, he had rejected a Prosecution Case forwarded by the Anti-Corruption Commission. And this Case is about Gyalposhing Land allotment where recipients include Royal Family members, Prime Minister and Ministers as per ACC notification.

Before OAG rejected the Case, the general public may have been under the impression that the Land Allotment Committee favoured big shots. Now after the rejection of the Case forwarded by the Anti-Corruption Commission, the general public is made to think that the Attorney General is carrying out the orders of the big shots. So the Attorney General’s attempt to garner favours for his selfish personal gains has further maligned the Government and the sacred Royal Institution through no fault of theirs. This Land Allotment Case could have been managed in a far more publicly palatable way without maligning any party.  
Likewise, he has got his Office to file this Case on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji in his pursuit to garner personal favour but in the process he is exposing real or imagined royal influence. He should have advised Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji to directly approach the Royal Court of Justice. That way any real or fictitious grievance could have been addressed by the Court without public display of any inference of Royal influence.
The Royal Bhutan Police has also over played its hand in accepting the complaint of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji through a Jabmi and then forwarding it to OAG for prosecution to bolster Dasho Ugen Tsechup’s stand. I wish to bring two issues to the attention of the Royal Court.
a) An ordinary Bhutanese needs High Court approval to appoint a Jabmi.
b) There was an embezzlement Case at Bhutan National Bank in Gelephu by the two top Bank Executives there. The Superintendent of RBP in Gelephu was personally involved in arranging fund for the two top executives to reimburse the embezzled fund. Did the Royal Bhutan Police forward the Case to the OAG?
I feel that the Chief of Police and the Attorney General are misusing the two important law enforcement and legal arms under the system of national governance to make possible the persecution of innocent people by the rich and socially powerful elites without them putting in even a minute of their personal time or a Cheltrum of their money.

It is recorded in the Minutes of the Board Meetings that Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji wanted Bhutan Times to be a ‘Political Paper’ and his Promoter friends had stated that financial profit was not their priority. Now they have in their possession the ‘Political Paper’ for 2013 Elections and they have also in their possession the Printing Press to print out the propaganda materials they require for the campaign. What more do these people desire? There seems to be no end or limit to the greed of the rich and socially well placed people. Why do they need to trample over everybody?

Regardless of Dasho Ugen Tsechup’s influence and the willingness of RBP and OAG to be his henchmen, I cannot be made to fund their ambitions. It is most shameful and disgusting that in-spite of the overwhelming evidence that underscored the proper financial transaction carried out in the generally accepted corporate norms, the Chief of Police and Attorney General have made it their Institutions’ responsibility to fabricate wrong doing in order to take up the cudgel for Dasho Ugen Tsechup.

I hereby submit the facts regarding the payment of Nu: 27, 94,698.

The sum of Nu: 27,94,698 was sanctioned and paid by Mr. N.B. Ghalley the competent authority of Bhutan Times Ltd. to the S.K.Y. Family against the buyback of 27,399 Shares and refund of TDS. Mr. N.B. Ghalley was the competent authority managing the closing affairs of Bhutan Times Ltd. As per the decision of the Promoter Group, the then Managing Director Kaka Tshering handed over his responsibilities and charges to Mr. N.B. Ghalley in the 1st week of June, 2012. Prior to that, on 23rd March, 2012, the Promoter Group accepted the resignation of Kaka Tshering and conferred upon Mr. N.B.Ghalley, the Finance Officer,the responsibility of dealing with payments to Parties. Therefore Mr. N.B. Ghalley held both the managerial and the financial responsibilities of Bhutan Time Ltd. He was holding the position of the Stand-in Managing Director cum Finance Manager and managing the closing affairs of Bhutan Times Ltd.

The amount consisted of two payments: one was the face value of my family’s 27,399 Shares of Bhutan Times Ltd. at Nu: 100 per Share which comes to Nu: 27, 39,900. And the other was the refund of Nu: 54,798 that had been retained by the Management as TDS deduction from the 2008 dividend payment. However, the Management was not able to deposit this TDS amount with Revenue Department as it was required to do so. Thus my family had to pay the income tax on the dividend in 2009 when PIT was filed. Therefore that amount was due to us.

The payment of Nu: 27, 94,698 was made from the available cash amount of Nu: 35, 00,000. There is no other separate Account which could meet the required payment. It was decided in the 5th AGM held on 31st May,2012 that cash balance would be used on priority basis to meet the commitments and obligations made in AGMS, Board Meetings and dues of the Management ( reference serial no: 6(a) of the minutes of the 5th AGM). And the balance of Nu: 7,05,302 from the Nu: 35,00,000 was deposited into the Checking Account of Bhutan Times Ltd. opened with Druk PNB, Thimphu. The issue as to how the cash of Nu: 35,00,000 came about is submitted in a separate statement attached to this response for the Royal Court’s kind reference, information and understanding.

Under the buyback arrangement approved by the 3rd AGM of May, 2010, the original Share Certificates of my family was surrendered to the Bhutan Times Management and accepted by the Stand-in Managing Director cum Finance Manager. He then paid the face value of the Shares and also refunded the TDS amount. A formal receipt for the payments received by my family was also handed over to the Bhutan Times Management. The transaction was completely executed in line with generally accepted norms of the corporate financial procedures.

There is no question of any wrong doing let alone keeping a sum of Nu: 27,94,698 without consulting anyone as alleged by the Attorney General.

Mr. N.B. Ghalley was already familiar with the buyback arrangement of Shares by the Corporation. In February, 2012, the Management of Bhutan Times processed the buyback procedures of 40,000 Shares of Tenzin Rigden. He was paid by way of adjustment against the Nu: 4.5 Million cash dues of CICCC ( Citizens Initiatives for Coronation and Centenary Celebrations). He along with few prominent Promoters was responsible for the CICCC venture that caused huge losses for the Corporation. The face value of Tenzin Rigden’s 40,000 Shares is Nu: 4 Million and the due was Nu: 4.5 Million. So he benefited by Nu: 4,20,000 after taking into consideration his eligibility for the refund of TDS amount of Nu: 80,000.

The buyback arrangement of my family Shares and that of the Shares of Tenzin Rigden was discussed and approved during the 3rd AGM of 28th and 29th May, 2010. However, for various reasons, the decision of 3rd AGM could be implemented by the Management only in 2012.

The buyback of my family’s Shares was based on the takeover of Bhutan Times Ltd. by the Promoter Groups ( 2 groups) through bifurcation between them the two main parts that constituted Bhutan Times Corporation Ltd. The two parts are : (a) Bhutan Times Newspaper and (b) Bhutan Times Printing Press. The Serial No: 4 of the Minutes of the 3rd AGM held on 28th and 29th May, 2010 provides full details of the bifurcation arrangement.

The Promoters had also executed an undertaking that legally binds them to the implementation of the bifurcation arrangement. My stand that my family being among Minority Shareholders would not join the Promoter Groups and instead have the Corporation buyback our Shares was accepted and endorsed in the AGM.

In June, 2010, Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji took over as the Chairman of Bhutan Times Ltd. He then deferred the implementation of the AGM approved bifurcation plan. AGM is the Supreme Body of a Corporation and both Board of Directors and the Management must adhere to the decisions and directives made in the AGM. Therefore, the deferment is not legitimate especially when there is already a legal undertaking executed by the Promoters to abide by the decision taken in the AGM on the matter of bifurcation. Even then because of his social position, it is necessary to be patient and swallow the bitter pills he dishes out.

However, by 1st April, 2012, the Promoter Group under the leadership of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji had taken over both the Bhutan Times Printing Press and the Bhutan Times Newspaper. They did not do it in a clean and legal way as decided in the 3rd AGM but never the less they took over through mala-fide maneuvers.

The taking over of Bhutan Times Printing Press and Bhutan Times Newspaper.

The Bhutan Times Printing Press located at Jemina was leased to Mr. Kinga of Galing Press for a period of 10 years from 1st June, 2008 to 1st June, 2018. The annual lease fee was Nu: 2 Million. Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his Promoter Group colluded with Mr. Kinga to surreptitiously take over the Printing Press. They cancelled the Lease Agreement effective 1st June, 2011 and then in December, 2011, the same Printing Press was sold to same Mr. Kinga at a ridiculously low price of Nu: 2.9 Million. And the building that housed the Printing Press was rented out to him at a monthly rent of Nu: 15 Thousand. No business person would agree to sell a property that had a guaranteed income of Nu: 2 Million a year for 10 years period for just Nu: 2.9 Million unless it involves under table dealing or serves an ulterior purpose. In other words, the Promoter Group in collusion with Mr. Kinga now possesses a Printing Press at a tiny fraction of its original cost. 

The Bhutan Time Newspaper has been hijacked by the same Promoter Group led by Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. On 1st April, 2012, the publication right of Bhutan Times Newspaper was transferred to IMS (Institute of Management Studies) which is owned by Tenzin Lekphell under an eye-wash Contract Agreement. IMS is a Management Institution not a Publishing House. Moreover IMS was refused a Newspaper Publishing License by the Ministry of Information and Communication a year back precisely because IMS is a Management Consulting Firm and had nothing to do with publishing business. IMS is just a front for the Promoter Group who actually now owns the Bhutan Times Newspaper.
The eye-wash Contract Agreement states that the contract is for one year. However since the Promoters have already destroyed the corporate and management structures of Bhutan Times Ltd., there is no way of reverting Bhutan Times Newspaper back to a non-existing Corporation.

The Board of Directors of Bhutan Times Ltd. comprise of 10 Directors of which nine are Promoters including the Chairman and I was the lone Director from among the Minority Shareholders. I had stopped attending the Board Meetings because the Promoters decide everything beforehand and use the Board Meeting to rubber stamp their decision. Towards the end of March 2012, Mr. Kaka Tshering the then Managing Director informed me over phone that the Promoters had decided to contract out the publishing of Bhutan Times Newspaper to their fellow Promoter Tenzin Lekphell who runs IMS. I told him that such critical decisions cannot be made by Promoters. It had to be discussed in a formal Board Meeting and then put up to the AGM. It seems Kaka Tshering conveyed my views to the Promoters. So they decided to pre-empt any objection I would raise especially in the AGM. They postponed the convening of the AGM which was proposed on 5th April, 2012 according to the Minutes of the 17th Board Meeting held on 6th March, 2012. Instead they immediately closed down Bhutan Times Corporation and dismissed all employees on 1st April, 2012 with one month pay in lieu of one month notice period. From the month of March itself, they had fixed the costs of Bhutan Times remaining Assets without involving the Managing Director or the Finance Manager and bought the same for themselves. Some of the Assets were divided among themselves without making any payments.

They are professional con-men who have developed professionalism in camouflaging illegal activities quite deceptively. They dismantled the Management structure of Bhutan Times Ltd., dismissed the employees, took over the Bhutan Times Printing Press under the guise of sale to Mr. Kinga and took over the banner product ‘Bhutan Times Newspaper’ under the guise of contracting its publication to IMS. All these unscrupulous acts were completed by 1st April, 2012. Then on 31st May, 2012, the Board of Directors Meeting was convened in the morning and the AGM in the afternoon. The Shareholders were informed that the Corporation had been closed down on 1st April, 2012 due to stiff competition from the other Newspapers and financial losses. It was two months too late for anyone to reconstruct Bhutan Times Corporation. I had rebuilt Bhutan Times into a sound financial footing after it went bankrupt in September, 2009 but that time the organizational structure and the infrastructure assets were in place. It was also futile to exchange war of words. I told Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji that I was against the IMS deal. In response he told me that the deal was executed by other Promoters in his absence. And later when they informed him, he had to go along.

I knew I could retrieve my family investment in accordance with the decision made in the 3rd AGM. However, it seemed that the Promoters had no intention to refund the investment made by other Minority Shareholders.  I decided to file a Case to make the Promoters refund at least the capital of the Minority Shareholders who, like my family, had bought the Shares of the Bhutan Times sold by the Promoters through floating of Public Shares.

I was able to collect most of the documents and also gain a clearer picture through informal discussions. However on 23rd June, 2012, the Management produced a hard copy of the email correspondence of 20/03/2012 between Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and Kaka Tshering. It confirmed that Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji was fully involved. Then and there I told the Management that I was surrendering my family Shares under the buyback arrangement and walking out from Bhutan Times for good. I wanted nothing further to do with any issues that related to old Bhutan Times and its Promoters.

Until this revelation, I was determined to file a Case as a Minority Shareholder Director on behalf of all Minority Shareholders and therefore I could not relinquish my family Shares as that would legally disqualify me as a Minority Board Director of Bhutan Times Ltd. But with Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji playing the central role for the Promoters, I just cannot file a Case against him. He is an uncle of our Nation’s most sacred Institution, His Majesty the King of Bhutan. Filing a Case against him could easily be misunderstood and misconstrued. And moreover in-spite of embracing democracy and independence of judiciary, no Bhutanese citizen, business entity or civil or legal agency would be prepared to take on Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji.
I never wanted nor still want to initiate a Court Case against Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji or any other person related to the Royal Family. My deep respects for the Royal Institution and the decorum ingrained in me by national culture and tradition,would never allow me to oppose real or imagined interests of such personalities.

In regards to the grievance of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and Tenzin Lekphell, I have this to submit to the Royal Court of Justice.

That a Bhutanese has the right to approach the Court to get his or her grievance addressed. And if the grievance is against me, I feel it is my duty and responsibility as a Bhutanese citizen to answer them in the Royal Court of Justice. But how can I be subjected to this blatant aggression carried out by the RBP and OAG on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji? Will the Royal Court of Justice protect me from this aggression? The Chief of Police serves at the pleasure of the Supreme Commander of the Defense Forces of Bhutan, His Majesty the King and the Attorney General is answerable to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of Bhutan. Therefore, must I again appeal to the two National Institutions to rein-in their Appointees and permit private grievances to be settled in a Court of Law without blatant display of aggression and influence by the RBP and the OAG on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his colleague? Under the prevailing situation, I have immense doubt whether any Court of Justice in Bhutan would be free of undue influence and stress to be able to dispense Justice in a fair manner.

If this Case filed by OAG on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his colleague Tenzin Lekphell is not withdrawn or thrown out and I am forced to go through court proceedings then I have no option but to answer the demands of Court procedures in like manner.

Accordingly, I beg to seek the kind permission of the Royal Court of Justice to file Counter Charges against the criminally motivated Promoters of Bhutan Times Ltd. Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji the Chairman, Tenzin Lekphell, Dago Beda and Phub Zam the Promoter Directors who actively engineered and engaged in the activities of corporate crimes listed below:

1.      They have knowingly and willfully deceived the Shareholders and betrayed their trust, the trust with which the company was built in the first place. Informing the Shareholders only after two months of dismantling of the Corporation was a calculated move with intent to deceive and thwart any attempts to foil their takeover plans. What they have done is a breach of public trust. They should be charged for corporate deception and manipulation which has led to the collapse of the only fully publicly owned media organization in Bhutan.

2.      Against my vehement objection and pleadings, the Promoters pushed through the deal for Bhutan Times Ltd. to partner in CICCC in 2008 that caused more than a crore ngultrum loss. The Managing Director Tenzin Rigden had to forfeit his Nu: 40 Lakhs Share value because of this folly. Therefore, the Promoter Directors must also forfeit equal amount because they supported wholeheartedly the same venture with him.  Only I, as a Minority Shareholder Director, vehemently opposed the venture but I was out voted. Dasho Ugen Tsechup himself has confirmed to the Shareholders during the 5th AGM that the CICCC venture ruined the company and that the then Managing Director Tenzin Rigden and Promoters were responsible for the debacle of the Corporation. A part of his address to the AGM is quoted herein:

1(c) “The other major setback for Bhutan Times was its forced participation in the CICCC by MD Mr. Tenzin Rigden who managed to convince some Promoters.”

3.      The Bhutan Times Printing Press at Jemina was leased to Mr. Kinga of Galing Press for a period of 10 years from 1st June, 2009 to 1st June, 2018 at an annual lease rent of Nu: 2 Million. The Promoters first cancelled the Lease Agreement as of 1st June, 2011 at the request of Mr. Kinga and then again sold the Printing Press to him for only Nu: 2.9 Million in December, 2011. That was the over the table price. What could have been under the table price? Dasho Ugen Tsechup and those Promoters must make good the losses that the Company suffered because of this shameful price fixing. How can a Printing Press that was leased out for Nu: 2 Million a year for a period of 10 years be sold for only Nu: 2.9 Million to the same person? It is an act of criminal daylight robbery and under table dealing. They had to have pocketed the difference or it was just a fictitious sale to gain ownership for them.

4.      Dasho Ugen Tsechup, Dago Beda, Tenzin Lekphell and Phub Zam engineered the coup that resulted in IMS not only taking over ‘Bhutan Times Newspaper’ but also all its related production system free of any cost. There was no formal Board of Directors Meeting to discuss the issue nor was the approval of AGM sought. The available record clearly shows that the Chairman and the Promoter Directors were involved in the heist to satisfy their greed for money and power. It is a criminal act of blatant robbery and total breach of trust by the Chairman and the Promoter Directors of the Corporation.

5.      The Promoters fixed the rates of the assets of the Corporation and then bought those items themselves. The Managing Director and the Finance Manager of the Corporation were not involved in the evaluation of the Assets. Only socially powerful people like them are able to indulge in such corporate crimes with impunity.
6.      In contracting out the publication of ‘Bhutan Times Newspaper’ to IMS, they have engaged in Business Fronting which is illegal as per Trade and Industry Regulation.
7.      They have also breached the BICMA Regulation by contracting out the publishing of ‘Bhutan Times Newspaper’ to IMS which is not a publishing house. It is a Management Consultancy Firm. In fact IMS was denied Publishing License by the Government for these very reasons.
8.      They must also refund the investment of other Minority Shareholders to the tune of Nu: 4.06 Million because the Promoters have taken over all the assets of the Corporation.

9.      According to the financial report of the Finance Manager, the decisions of the Promoter Directors are solely responsible for the loss of Nu: 4.2 Million for the year 2011. Therefore they have to be held liable for the losses.

They have shamelessly flouted their social and money power and have recklessly caused the disintegration of a very prominent Corporation. They must be made accountable for the lost investments, lack of corporate ethic and for breaching trust of Shareholders and transgressing all corporate norms and laws governing the licensing and business operation of a Corporation. They have to be held responsible for the loss of the capital investment as well as the yearly profits that a Corporation normally makes.

I humbly and very earnestly beg the Royal Court of Justice to please review their criminal activities under the Penal Codes 265, 267, 287, 512 and  Civil and Criminal procedure code 108 and 108 (I). And in addition, order them to restitute under Penal Code 46 the following financial losses of the Corporation inflicted by them.    
1. The Promoters share of CICCC financial losses suffered by
the Bhutan Times Ltd.                                                                                     Nu: 45,00,000
2. The Financial loss from cancellation of Lease Agreement of
the Printing Press for the period covering 1st June,
 2011 – to – 1st June, 2018 ( 20,00,000 X 7 years = 1,40,00,000 )
less Nu: 29, 00, 000 sale proceeds of Printing Press.                                     Nu: 1,11,00,000          
3. Refund of capital to other Minority Shareholders since the
Promoters have taken over all the assets of Bhutan Times Ltd.                       Nu: 40,60,000
4. Compensation for deliberately causing losses for the year 2011
as reported by the Finance Manager in the 18th Board Meeting.                      Nu: 42,13,465
The total sum of Nu: 45, 00,000 + Nu: 1, 11, 00,000 + Nu: 42, 13,465 = Nu: 1, 98, 13,465 should have been the profit of the Corporation. My Family is entitled to 6.84% of this profit which comes to Nu: 13, 55, 241. The other Minority Shareholders is entitled to 10.16% of the profit which comes to Nu: 20, 13,048. The sum of Nu: 40,60,000 represents the investment made by the other Minority Shareholders who had been left high and dry after the Promoters hijacked the Corporation and, therefore, the same must be refunded to them.

Most respectfully and humbly, I beg to submit the above submissions to the Royal Court of Justice in response to the allegations filed by the Attorney General on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his business colleagues.

I beg to remain

Most Respectfully

( Sangey  )
Jushina Village, Thimphu.Tel. No: (02) 322126 / 17667003 .

OAG letter to Court withdrawing the charges and the Case dated: 22nd November, 2012

The appeal to His Majesty the King with an attachment titled, 'The Case in Question'


His Majesty the King
Tashichhodzong, Thimphu
Kingdom of Bhutan

Your Majesty,                                                                                                                  8th Oct. 2012

Prayer for reasonable restrain of OAG

Most humbly and respectfully, I bow before Your Majesty and humbly seek Your Majesty’s benevolent intervention in the matter of Office of Attorney General aiding Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his colleague Tenzin Lekphell in their heinous attempt to inflict vengeance upon me for preserving humble right to protect my family investment.

As per the OAG Act, it is constituted to manage the official Legal Affairs of the Nation and the Government and “any other issues assigned or referred to by the Druk Gyalpo or the Government.”

It is not supposed to conduct or lead a personal vengeance attack on behalf of socially well placed private individuals to the detriment of another citizen of Bhutan. It is not supposed to misconstrue a formal and official corporate financial transaction into a criminal offence and then use it as an excuse to interfere, intervene, harass and forment prejudice to misdirect judicial process.

The Articles of the OAG Act clearly defines OAG’s responsibilities, empowerment, jurisdiction and immunity. However, the OAG is now exceeding its empowerment. It is now involving in settling private scores of individual citizens.

What OAG is doing is not legal prosecution. It is engaged in illegal persecution on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. Yes, I am the present victim so I am to suffer. But in the process of such misuse of power by OAG, the Nation will also be wounded and the good name of His Majesty the King and the Royal Family damaged. It is an act of sabotage in the confidence of the people in their trust of the Institution of Monarchy.
I appeal to Your Majesty to please restrain the OAG and Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. I am not trying to pre-empt judicial process for Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji if he wishes to seek judicial redress of his perceived grievance but he should not be using OAG or RBP Institutions to inflict personal vengeance.
As per the Act, the OAG is immune to prosecution by any private citizen or agency. Only His Majesty the King and the Prime Minister have the authority to rein-in OAG to its prescribed responsibility and judicious exercise of its empowerment.

On behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and his colleague Mr. Tenzin Lekphell, the OAG has trumped up a criminal case against me. The OAG filed the Case with the Chief Judge of Thimphu District Royal Court of Justice on 5th October, 2012 ( My Birthday ) and ordered RBP to produce me before the Court. The Chief Judge has directed the case to Bench III. I have been ordered to await further Court summons. There cannot be legal justice when OAG is involved in prosecution of cases that are outside its mandate.

I make this direct appeal to Your Majesty because I sincerely believe that this collusion between OAG and Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji cannot have the endorsement of the national sovereign authority of Your Majesty.  For Your Majesty’s review of the actual case matter, I beg to submit attached herewith a brief titled ‘The Case in Question’. A comprehensive report with supporting documents is already with the Police as per their demand.

I offer my humble respects and remain most grateful for Royal benevolence. I beg to remain a true and dedicated citizen of Your Majesty.

Most humbly


( Wangcha Sangey ) 
CID No: 10503001432
P.O.Box: 195, Jushina Thimphu.
Tel. # 17667003/ ( 02 )322126.

                                                              The Case in Question

On 1st April, 2012, Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and several other Promoter Shareholders of Bhutan Times Ltd., enforced their plan to surreptitiously take over the Corporation and leave the Minority Shareholders high and dry. They sacked all employees with one month pay in lieu of notice period, made a show of selling the Company assets which they themselves bought and colluded to lease out the publishing of Bhutan Times Sunday Paper to a separate company called IMS owned by several Promoter Shareholders of Bhutan Times Ltd. in their individual capacity and headed by Tenzin Lekphell as CEO.  

Two months after the surreptitious takeover of the Company and destroying the very structure of the old Bhutan Times Ltd. Corporation, the outgoing Managing Director called a Board Meeting in the morning of 31st May, 2012 and an AGM in the afternoon of the same day and confirmed the structural destruction of the old Bhutan Times Ltd. Company.

In the Board Meeting as well as in the AGM on 31st May, 2012, the outgoing Managing Director informed that Bhutan Times Ltd. did not exist anymore. Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji who was the Chairman in conjunction with four Promoter Directors including Tenzin Lekphell had closed down the company two months back. Almost all staffs have been sacked and assets sold off. And that Bhutan Times Sunday Paper publication was taken over by another company i.e. IMS for an annual fee of Nu: 3, 00,000.
Bhutan Times Ltd. had two main assets :

1) The well known brand, ‘Bhutan Times Sunday Paper’. This has been hijacked by Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and Tenzin Lekphell under the guise of IMS.
2) The Bhutan Times Printing Press at Jemina. This Printing Press was leased to Mr. Kinga at an annual rental fee of Nu: 20 Lakhs for a period of 10 years beginning June, 2009.

Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji, Tenzin Lekphell and few other Promoters colluded together to cancel the Lease Agreement and instead sold the Printing Press to the same person Mr. Kinga for a total price of Nu: 29 Lakhs. Mr. Kinga is related to few of the Promoters. Can any Corporate crime be so heinous then selling the Printing Press that was fetching an annual rental income of Nu: 20 Lakhs being sold for Nu: 29 Lakhs only? The building that housed the Printing Press was rented out to the same person Mr. Kinga at Nu: 15,000 a month. In other words, the Promoters in collusion with Mr. Kinga now possess a Printing Press at a tiny fraction of its original cost.

The effectiveness of any protest in either the Board Meeting or AGM forums convened on 31st May, 2012 against such an illegal and dictatorial decision was two months too late. The crime perpetrators had devalued the assets of the Company and bought the same directly or indirectly for themselves. The structure of the old Bhutan Times Ltd. Corporation had been totally dismantled.

I felt disgusted and deeply wronged. Previously in 2009, this same group of Promoter Shareholders had caused the near bankruptcy of Bhutan Times Ltd. and I had to spend 9 months of painful and frustrating time bringing the Corporation to a sound financial footing. And now after 2 years, the Corporation had been surreptitiously dismantled to suit the greed of the few. However, for so many reasons including the social cost and pressures, I felt that a legal recourse to reconstruct Bhutan Times Ltd. Corporation was out of the league of any ordinary common person of my status and resource. At that time I did not comprehend the full extent of Dasho Ugen Tsechup’s personal role in the surreptitious takeover by Promoters. Much later in the last week of June, I was shown an email exchange between the previous MD Kaka Tshering and Dasho which revealed the full extent of latter’s involvement.

There was no other recourse except to exercise my right to claim back the investment of my family. Sometime back, during the 3rd AGM in May, 2010, a decision had been made whereby if the Promoters who owned 83% of the Company took over the Corporation then the Minority Shareholders who had bought the Company shares from the stock market could exercise their option to either join the Promoters or have their shares bought back by the Company.

I had informed the same AGM that incase of takeover of the Corporation by the Promoters themselves, my family’s shares shall be surrendered to the Corporation under the buyback arrangement. This proposal was accepted and endorsed by all the members. And a supplementary legal document dividing the company between two groups of promoters was executed. On 1st April, 2012, Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and a group of Promoters had decided to jointly take over the Company but in a very surreptitious manner.

In keeping with the decision of the 3rd AGM and the supplementary Legal Agreement executed by the Promoters, I processed for the buyback arrangement for my family shares of Bhutan Times Ltd. I surrendered the original Share Certificates of my family to the stand-in Managing Director cum Finance Manager and he sanctioned the par value of Nu: 27, 39,900 payment. In addition Nu: 54, 798 that had been withheld by the Corporation was also released back to my family. All necessary transaction formalities were completed as per general norms of the Corporation. It was totally legal and official.

Bhutan Times Ltd. Management had conducted similar transactions before. That was how Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji became a Promoter of Bhutan Times Ltd. in place of Mr. Tashi Wangdi. That was how Mr. Tenzin Rigden’s dues were adjusted by the Corporation buying back his shares in the Company worth Nu: 40 Lakhs.

However, it seems that Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and Tenzin Lekphell did not even want to honour the buyback arrangement passed by the AGM. They expected my family who owned 6.84% of the company to simply surrender under duress and walk away empty handed. So they hired a legal firm to file a trumped up charges against me to the Royal Bhutan Police instead of to a Royal Court of Justice. He chose to take his grievance to the Royal Bhutan Police and to OAG instead of the Royal Court of Justice because he would have better success as now proven at utilizing their arbitrary powers to his benefit.  As he had planned, the Royal Bhutan Police and subsequently the Office of Attorney General have lent themselves as his tools to white wash his criminal deeds and attempt to penalize me for daring to exercise my humble legal right to protect my family investment.  With God and the King as my witness, I pray that Justice will ultimately prevail because the buyback arrangement of my family shares by the Company is as per the decision of AGMs and commitment made by all the Shareholders especially the Promoters.

If Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji or any other individual wants to get the Royal Court of Justice to address their perceived grievance against me, that is their right. I shall respect the due process of Legal Justice. But why are RBP and OAG intervening on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and misusing their powers to settle his personal score with a private citizen?

The RBP called me and asked for explanation. I submitted a full and factual account with all official documentary evidences. Then OAG took over the case and filed a court case against me on behalf of Dasho Ugen Tsechup and Tenzin Lekphell. The OAG is lending its full official support to Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji, Tenzin Lekphell and few other Promoters who are the real corporate crime perpetrators and persecuting me to submission and silence. Such blatant prejudiced actions of OAG lead to legal injustice. And further slurs the image of the Royal Family and corrupts the pureness of the Sacred Royal Image. OAG needs to be restrained to perform within the empowerment of OAG Act and only His Majesty the King and the Prime Minister have the necessary authority to do so.

Therefore, I am being compelled to bring this atrocious deed of OAG to the kind attention of His Majesty the King and the Hon’ble Prime Minister.

A similar appeal letter to His Excellency the Prime Minister

His Excellency the Prime Minister
Royal Government of Bhutan
Thimphu                                                                                                                          8th Oct. 2012                                          

Your Excellency,
Sub : OAG’s interference into private dispute

Most respectfully, I beg to submit to Your Excellency a copy of my submission to His Majesty the King regarding OAG being a tool of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. The letters give the details that I wish to bring to the kind attention of Your Excellency. As submitted to His Majesty, there are only two authorities in Bhutan that can rein-in OAG to its given mandate and empowerment. So I am appealing to the King and the Prime Minister to restrain both RBP and OAG from fighting private battles of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji.

When RBP and OAG blatantly acts as the official goons of Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji and files trumped up criminal Charges against me on his behalf with the Royal Court of Justice, what recourse is there for the Judiciary? The Judiciary is being literally forced to become the favorable play ground of the rich and the powerful.

I understand that none of the Government Agencies, RBP or OAG would want to make Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji accountable for the Corporate misdeeds he had committed. But why do they go out of their lawful parameters to blatantly help him to inflict his vengeance because he thinks I stood up against him? If Dasho wants to make Bhutan Times his own “Political Paper” as so stated by him in the 17th Board Meeting and if his fellow Promoter Directors feel that “profit is not a priority” as so recorded in the 16th Board Meeting, why do I need to contribute to their goal? My investment purpose was commercial. So I had to cut my losses and part ways with them. I do not want to waste my time in futile attempts to stand up against anyone let alone such a powerful social figure as Dasho Ugen Tsechup Dorji. I respect the social hierarchy, the Government and the Royal Institution. Therefore, why would I ever want to defy anyone?  I only stand for my humble right to exist and live an uncomplicated simple family life of common man.

I have no doubt that such powerful political oppression will bear their evil fruit and I would have to bear the brunt. However, for the sake of the Nation and all humble common people of Bhutan, I would like to submit to Your Excellency to kindly look into the future. These same official tools can also become destructive forces in the hand of others who may also come to power in the distant future of this Kingdom.  Involvement of OAG, a legal arm of the government, in the dispute that is purely private would indeed be setting a dangerous precedent.

With my respects

Most humbly


Wangcha Sangey

Copy to:  1. His Excellency, the Home Minister, Tashichhodzong.
  2.  Hon’ble Secretary, His Majesty’s Royal Secretariat, Tashichhodzong.