Censorship in Bhutan

Censorship in Bhutan refers to the way in which the Government of Bhutan controls information within its borders. There are no laws that either guarantee citizens' right to information or explicitly structure a censorship scheme. However, censorship in Bhutan is still conducted by restrictions on the ownership of media outlets, licensing of journalists, and the blocking of websites.

Through 2008, individuals were able to criticize the government publicly; however, the government did at times attempt to impede criticism and monitor political meetings. Through 2008, newspapers operated freely and published stories critical of the government. Foreign newspapers and magazines were also available. Bhutan also has three private FM radio stations. Through 2008, the government allowed foreign broadcasts and did not censor broadcast content. Private radio and television stations were active and expressed a variety of views, although the government may have limited the number of television channels available. International organizations maintained that the cable costs were often more prohibitive than government restrictions.

Individuals and groups are generally permitted to engage in peaceful expression of views via the Internet. Government officials state that the government does not block access, restrict content, or censor Web sites. However, Freedom House reports the government occasionally blocks access to Web sites containing pornography or information deemed offensive to the state; but that such blocked information typically does not extend to political content. In its Freedom of the Press 2012 report, Freedom House described high levels of self censorship among media practitioners, despite few reports of official intimidation or threats. The constitution provides for freedom of speech including for members of the press, and the government generally respects these rights in practice. Citizens can publicly and privately criticize the government without reprisal. The constitution states that persons "shall not be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on the person’s honor and reputation," and the government generally respects these prohibitions. Government officials said forum discussions on bhutantimes. com were too critical of Minister Sangey Nidup, maternal uncle of the king. In August 2007, bhutantimes. com reported that the government lifted its block on service within the country.

Journalists in Bhutan face very little freedom of the media. They are faced with criminal charges just for posts on their personal Facebook accounts. From 2016 2018, there have been two new cases regarding the prosecution of journalists who posted on their personal Facebook accounts about property disputes and child mistreatment. While the facts of these two incidents happened to be true, they both were still sentenced to 3 months in prison and required to pay a heavy fine. Bhutan government officials have enacted new laws that restricts what can be shared on social media. While the constitution in Bhutan guarantees freedom of speech, civil servants, such as journalists, are denied this right because of a law that states, "A civil servant shall not critique his agency and the Royal Government,". Bhutan is praised for its high level of "gross domestic happiness" but its people are beginning to face increasingly strict censorship in the media.

Modernly, Bhutan has regulated its domestic media since enactment of the Bhutan Information Communications and Media Act in July 2006. It created an independent body, the Bhutan Information Communications and Media Authority (BICMA), which was formerly a part of the Ministry for Information and Communications. BICMA is responsible for regulating communications, their technology, and their means in Bhutan

The Act provides for considerable discretion, including that consideration be given to "peace, stability and well being" in taking over communications services and facilities, In practice, some criticism of the government was allowed, including critical postings on government Web sites.