In the shadow of the Commonwealth: legal education and democratisation in Bhutan.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bhutan, located to the north east of India is not part of the Commonwealth. However, during the early 20th century the British colonial administration developed close ties with Bhutan. During the first part of the twentieth century the newly established monarchy focussed on consolidating its power. In the second, major economic and social reforms were introduced by the third king. These reforms included the creation of the High Court. However, it was not until the early 1990s that the need for legal education was recognised by the Bhutanese state. Since the early 1990s, Bhutanese graduates have been sent to study law in India. A National Legal Course was designed to provide training in Bhutanese law. However, increasing numbers of Bhutanese students have studied in India and subsequently, funding permitting, studied for LLMs in Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, the US and the UK. The appearance of the first cohort of formally educated lawyers created the basis for reforms to the Bhutanese judiciary in the early part of the twenty first century. Importantly, Commonwealth educated Bhutanese lawyers supported the Chief Justice, the Chairman of the Constitutional Drafting Committee. Based on archival research and interviews this paper considers how Bhutan, although not a member of the Commonwealth, has through its close links with India and its membership of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation worked closely with law schools and judiciaries in a range of Commonwealth countries. The paper highlights the historical connections between British India and Bhutan, the transformation of its relationship with India and the recognition of the importance of legal education. The paper then considers the role of legal education on the Bhutanese justice system. In particular, the moves by the judiciary to provide information at a local level about the legal system and its increasing complexity. Finally, the paper examines the impact of Bhutanese lawyers studying at Commonwealth law schools specifically in relation to the recent process of democratisation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".