Message of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the Fourteenth Assembly of
the Tibetan People’s Deputies
March 14th 2011
To the members of the Fourteenth Assembly
of the Tibetan People’s Deputies,
It is common knowledge that ancient Tibet,
consisting of three provinces (Cholkha-sum) was ruled
by a line
of forty-two Tibetan kings beginning with Nyatri Tsenpo (127 BCE), and
ending
with Tri Ralpachen (838 CE). Their rule spanned almost one thousand
years.
During that time, Tibet was known throughout Inner Asia as a powerful
nation,
comparable in military power and political influence with Mongolia and
China.
With the development of Tibetan literature, the richness and breadth of
the
religion and culture of Tibet meant that its civilisation was considered
second
only to that of India.
Following the fragmentation of central
authority in the 9th century, Tibet was governed by several
rulers
whose authority was limited to their respective fiefdoms. Tibetan unity
weakened with the passage of time. In the early 13th century,
both
China and Tibet came under the control of Genghis Khan. Although Drogon
Choegyal Phagpa restored the sovereignty of Tibet in the 1260s, and his
rule
extended across the three provinces, the frequent change of
rulers under
the Phagmo Drupas, Rinpungpas and Tsangpas over the next 380 years or so
resulted in a failure to maintain a unified Tibet. The absence of any
central
authority and frequent internal conflicts caused Tibet’s political power
to
decline.
Since the Fifth Dalai Lama’s founding of
the Ganden Phodrang Government of Tibet in 1642, successive Dalai Lamas
have
been both the spiritual and temporal leaders of Tibet. During the reign
of the
Fifth Dalai Lama, all the 13 myriarchies or administrative districts of
Tibet
enjoyed political stability, Buddhism flourished in Tibet and the
Tibetan
people enjoyed peace and freedom.
During the late 19th and early
20th centuries, Tibet not only lacked adequate political
governance,
but also missed the opportunity to develop effective international
relations.
The Thirteenth Dalai Lama assumed temporal power in 1895, but was
compelled to
flee to Mongolia and China in 1904, due to the invasion of British
forces, and
to India in 1910, when the Manchu China invaded. Once circumstances
allowed him
to return to Tibet, the Thirteenth Dalai Lama re-asserted Tibetan
sovereignty
in 1913. As a result of what he had learned in exile, the Thirteenth
Dalai Lama
introduced modern education and made reforms to strengthen the
government of
Tibet. Although these steps produced positive results, he was unable to
fulfil
his overall vision, as is evident from his last political testament of
1932,
the year before his death. Despite the lacklustre political leadership
and
short-comings of the regents and their administrations, the Ganden
Phodrang
Government has on the whole provided stable governance for the last four
centuries.
Since I was young, I have been aware of an
urgent need to modernize the Tibetan political system. At the age of
sixteen, I
was compelled to assume political leadership. At that time I lacked a
thorough
understanding of Tibet’s own political system, let alone international
affairs.
However, I had a strong wish to introduce
appropriate reforms in accordance with the changing times and was able
to
effect some fundamental changes. Unfortunately, I was unable to carry
these
reforms any further due to circumstances beyond my control.
Soon after our arrival in India in April
1959, we set up departments with Kalons (Ministers) in charge of
education,
preservation of culture and the rehabilitation and welfare of the
community.
Similarly, in 1960, aware of the importance of democratization, the
first
Commission of Tibetan People’s Deputies was elected and in 1963 we
promulgated
the Draft Constitution for a Future Tibet.
No system of governance can ensure
stability and progress if it depends solely on one person without the
support
and participation of the people in the political process. One man rule
is both
anachronistic and undesirable. We have made great efforts to strengthen
our
democratic institutions to serve the long-term interests of the six
million
Tibetans, not out of a wish to copy others, but because democracy is the
most
representative system of governance. In 1990, a committee was formed to
draft
the Charter for Tibetans-in-Exile and a year later the total strength of
the
Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies (ATPD), the Tibetans in exile’s
highest
law-making body, was increased. In 1991, the Eleventh ATPD formally
adopted the
Charter for Tibetans-in-Exile and assumed all legislative authority.
Given the
limitations of our life in exile these are achievements of which we can
be
proud.
In 2001, the Tibetan people elected the
Kalon Tripa, the political leader, directly for the first time. Since
then, I
have been in semi-retirement, no longer involving myself in the
day-to-day
administration, but able to dedicate more time to general human welfare.
The essence of a democratic system is, in
short, the assumption of political responsibility by elected leaders for
the
popular good. In order for our process of democratization to be
complete, the
time has come for me to devolve my formal authority to such an elected
leadership. The general lack of experience and political maturity in our
democratic institutions has prevented us from doing this earlier.
Given that the line of Dalai Lamas has
provided political leadership for nearly four centuries, it might be
difficult
for Tibetans generally and especially those in Tibet to envisage and
accept a
political system that is not led by the Dalai Lama. Therefore, over the
past 50
years I have tried in various ways to raise people’s political awareness
and
encourage their participation in our democratic process.
In my 10th March statement of
1969, for instance, I stated, “When the day comes for Tibet to be
governed by
its own people, it will be for the people to decide as to what form of
government they will have. The system of governance by the line of the
Dalai
Lamas may or may not be there. In particular, the opinion of the
forward-looking younger generation will be an influential factor.”
Similarly, in my 10th March
statement of 1988, I stated, “As I have said many times, even the
continuation
of the institution of the Dalai Lama is for the people to decide.” Since
the
1980s, I have repeatedly advised the Kashag, ATPD and the public that
Tibetans
should take full responsibility for the administration and welfare of
the
people as if the Dalai Lama were not there.
I informed the Chairman of the Thirteenth
ATPD and the then Chief Justice Commissioner that I should be relieved
of
functions related to my political and administrative status, including
such
ceremonial responsibilities as the signing of bills adopted by the
legislative
body. However, my proposal was not even considered. On 31st
August
2010, during the First Tibetan General Meeting (organized by ATPD), I
explained
this again in detail. Now, a decision on this important matter should be
delayed no longer. All the necessary amendments to the Charter and other
related regulations should be made during this session so that I am
completely
relieved of formal authority.
I want to acknowledge here that many of my
fellow Tibetans, inside and outside Tibet, have earnestly requested me
to
continue to give political leadership at this critical time. My
intention to
devolve political authority derives neither from a wish to shirk
responsibility
nor because I am disheartened. On the contrary, I wish to devolve
authority solely
for the benefit of the Tibetan people in the long run. It is extremely
important that we ensure the continuity of our exile Tibetan
administration and
our struggle until the issue of Tibet has been successfully resolved.
If we have to remain in exile for several
more decades, a time will inevitably come when I will no longer be able
to
provide leadership. Therefore, it is necessary that we establish a sound
system
of governance while I remain able and healthy, in order that the exile
Tibetan
administration can become self-reliant rather than being dependent on
the Dalai
Lama. If we are able to implement such a system from this time onwards, I
will
still be able to help resolve problems if called upon to do so. But, if
the
implementation of such a system is delayed and a day comes when my
leadership
is suddenly unavailable, the consequent uncertainty might present an
overwhelming challenge. Therefore, it is the duty of all Tibetans to
make every
effort to prevent such an eventuality.
As one among the six million Tibetans,
bearing in mind that the Dalai Lamas have a special historic and karmic
relationship with the
Tibetan people, and as long as Tibetans place their trust and faith in
me, I
will continue to serve the cause of Tibet.
Although Article 31 of the Charter spells
out provisions for a Council of Regency, it was formulated merely as an
interim
measure based on past traditions. It does not include provisions for
instituting a system of political leadership without the Dalai Lama.
Therefore,
amendments to the Charter on this occasion must conform to the framework
of a
democratic system in which the political leadership is elected by the
people
for a specific term. Thus, all the necessary steps must be taken,
including the
appointment of separate committees, to amend the relevant Articles of
the
Charter and other regulations, in order that a decision can be reached
and
implemented during this very session.
As a result, some of my political
promulgations such as the Draft Constitution for a Future Tibet (1963)
and
Guidelines for Future Tibet’s Polity (1992) will become ineffective. The
title
of the present institution of the Ganden Phodrang headed by the Dalai
Lama should
also be changed accordingly.
With my prayers for the successful
proceedings of the house.
Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai
Lama
11th March 2011
Note: Translated from the
Tibetan
original, which should be considered final and authoritative.
