November 21: The second hearing on the Phobjikha land transfer case was held yesterday with the four defendants arguing their case. The four defendants are former Wangdi Dzongda Pem L Dorji, former Wangdi Drangpon Kunzang Tobgay, former Phobji Chimi Passang Dorji, and former Phobji Gup Wangchuk.

In September the Wangduephodrang Dzongkhag court acquitted all four of corruption charges saying the court could not establish that the defendants had gained or intended to gain any benefits from their involvement.

The Anti-Corruption Commission and the Office of the Attorney General re-appealed the case in the high court.

In the first hearing last week, the office of the attorney general charged former Wangdue Dzongda, former Phobji Gup, and former Phobji Chimi of misinforming that the land was community owned though they all knew that the land was owned by the government.

Drangpon Kunzang Tobgay was charged of issuing the mutation order without proper investigation and without keeping it pending for a period of one month. Drangpon Kunzang Tobgay said he issued the mutation order in keeping with the law and after completing the procedures. He said as per the law, mutation order for land that has been offered free of cost need not be kept pending for a period of one month.

The three other defendants today denied the charges against them. They said the land was at the time being used as grazing land and they were under the impression that the land was owned by the community.

Former Wangdue Dzongda Pem L Dorji said since the land was registered under the Phobjikha Gewog, he felt the land was owned by the Phobjikha community and not by the government.

During the first hearing, the Office of the Attorney General said former Wangdue Dzongda Pem L Dorji was aware that the land belongs to the government since he signed the lease agreement on behalf of the government when the land was leased for pasture development.

In his argument today former Wangdue Dzongda Pem L Dorji said the Dzongkhag Administration has no authority to lease out government land. He said the community members along with the grassroots leaders had submitted in writing that the land is owned by the community and is used by them as grazing land. He had merely used the documents submitted by them to process the ownership transfer.