As the Tibetan exile community enters election season, heightened visits by leaders raise questions about accountability, democratic integrity, and the true purpose behind their outreach, writes London-based Tibetan blogger Tsering Passang.
As the Tibetan diaspora prepares for the 2026 general elections, one cannot help but notice a surge of engagement by elected leaders of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). From community gatherings to cultural events, and even parliamentary meetings abroad, the visibility of our political representatives is higher than at any other point in the term.
But is this renewed attentiveness driven by a deep commitment to the people – or is it a carefully choreographed election-year routine?
Earlier this year, three Tibetan Members of Parliament, led by Speaker Sonam Tenphel and senior MP Dawa Tsering, visited the UK on a parliamentary learning session. Admirably, they made space in their packed schedule to meet the local Tibetan community. Yet, when asked a simple but fundamental question – “What have been your key achievements this term?” – the responses offered little clarity. One Chithue dismissed the question as “demeaning,” while another claimed that upholding the CTA’s official “Middle Way” policy was their foremost contribution.
Surely, Tibetan constituents – whether in India, Europe, or elsewhere – have every right to ask such questions of their representatives. Isn’t that the very basis of democratic engagement? Should the MPs not be proud to share tangible achievements, legislative milestones, or new ideas advanced during their term?
Sikyong Penpa Tsering, the incumbent President of the CTA, has likewise increased his presence in the diaspora – visiting the UK at least three times during his tenure. This weekend, he will attend the annual function of the London School of Tibetan Language & Culture (LSTLC) as Chief Guest, where children will showcase the cultural knowledge and skills they have acquired throughout the year. This event – coordinated with the support of Tibet House Trust, teachers and parents – rightly deserves commendation for preserving Tibetan identity in exile.
Later that evening, Sikyong will address the broader Tibetan community in a public gathering organised by the Tibetan Community in Britain. On Monday, he will also attend a parliamentary meeting hosted by the Scottish National Party (SNP) MP Chris Law, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Tibet in Westminster – highlighting the continued engagement between the Tibetan leadership and British lawmakers. He is also scheduled to interact with the young Tibetans during this trip.
These are positive developments, and such visibility and interaction with both the public and political allies are important. But the question remains: why now?
With the CTA’s election committees already activated and the preliminary round of voting expected later this year, the timing of these visits raises critical questions. Are these appearances rooted in a long-term commitment to public service – or are they driven by electoral calculations?
To be fair, Sikyong Penpa Tsering is one of the most hardworking Tibetan leaders in living memory. In addition to serving as the political leader of the CTA, he holds four key departmental portfolios: Finance, Health, Home, and Religion & Culture. His three ministerial colleagues – all women – manage the Departments of Education, Security, and International Relations. While the Sikyong’s multitasking may be a reflection of his capacity, it also signals an unhealthy centralisation of power – and a lack of delegation that should concern any democracy.
Should any one individual hold such an overwhelming share of responsibilities in a functioning democratic system?
Furthermore, Sikyong Penpa Tsering has stated previously that he will not participate in public election debates with his opponents, citing the risk of creating divisions within the community. While this concern is understandable, such a stance risks undermining the very foundations of democratic practice. Constructive debate is not divisive – it is vital. It allows voters to compare visions, scrutinise policies, and assess leadership. Refusing to debate publicly not only denies the electorate this opportunity, it also sends an unfortunate message: that transparency and competition are to be feared, not embraced.
Accountability must never be seen as a threat. It is the oxygen of democracy.
As Tibetan voters – many of whom live in free societies where democratic norms are cherished – we must ask: what kind of democracy do we want to see flourish in our exile institutions? One that celebrates ceremony and speeches, or one that insists on scrutiny, debate, and delivery?
As families gather this weekend in London to celebrate their children’s cultural achievements, there will be pride and hope. But we should also approach these events with clear eyes and thoughtful questions. Have our leaders shown consistent commitment to the wellbeing of the diaspora – whether on issues of youth engagement, elder care, mental health, or rising living costs? Have they put forward bold ideas to advance the Tibetan cause on the world stage? Have they strengthened democratic structures within the CTA – or simply maintained the status quo?
These are the questions the electorate must begin asking – not just at election time, but throughout each parliamentary term. Civic engagement, after all, should not be seasonal.
Let us welcome community visits, cultural celebration, and political dialogue. But let us also demand accountability, responsiveness, and courage from those who seek to lead.
Democracy in exile must not be reduced to an illusion. It must be lived – with responsibility, with integrity, and above all, with trust in the people.
Tsering Passang, a blogger, is the Founder and Chair of the Global Alliance for Tibet & Persecuted Minorities and a long-time advocate for Tibetan rights and democratic values.
Global Alliance for Tibet & Persecuted Minorities (GATPM) 