The Belgaum brouhaha

The controversy over orthodox community activist Khojeste Mistree representing the Belgaum Anjuman at the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meetings has sparked off a storm in the once peaceful north western Karnataka community.

At a turbulent meet on April 3, 2005 in Belgaum the embattled president Maki Kapadia is said to have rallied many of the Irani Zoroastrian members to ward off an offensive by the dissident group. The Anjuman leadership is reportedly expected to issue a press release justifying their action. Mistree is also reported to have been invited to address the Anjuman.

Mistree, who has no ties to Belgaum, has represented the Anjuman at the last two meetings of the Federation in Bom­bay and Ahmedabad. At the Ahmedabad meet his followers, ostensibly repre­senting small anjumans, disrupted the all India body’s delibera­tions for half an hour, the first ever such interruption in the body’s history.

Anguished at the negative publicity their Anjuman was receiving thanks to Mistree’s particular brand of politics, seven members of the 40-50 strong Anjuman wrote a letter dated March 13, 2005 to the Parsi Press voicing their objection. The letter states:

We, the undersigned, are subscribing members of the Belgaum Parsi Zarthosti Anjuman, and are shocked to find from the pages of the Press that our small, easygoing Anjuman, which has a moderate outlook on most matters, is suddenly in the eye of a storm. We are greatly distressed by the same and would like to put a few facts on record.

Mistree: com­-plete stranger

That Khojeste Mistree was sent as a representative of the Bel­gaum Anjuman by our Karobhari Committee was known to us only when it appeared in the Press. In fact, those who do not subscribe to community papers or magazines probably have no idea to date about the matter. No one has been asked about this. (Rukshana Nanji, one of the undersigned, though being an office bearer was unaware that Mistree was planning to go any further than to seek clarifi­cation concerning the world body. She has subsequently resigned from the committee.)

We are strangers to Mistree just as he is a complete stranger to us. We have never had any interaction with him. We hear that Mistree is acquainted with our president, beyond this, as far as we know, nobody in Belgaum appears to know him.

No general body meeting has ever been called to discuss the formation of the world body. No discussion/debate has ever taken place to arrive at a consensus or decision about this issue. Hence not even our own president or office bearers can claim to know the opinions/views of the general body in this regard, let alone a complete stranger.

We strongly believe that the decision to support or oppose the proposed world body can only be taken by our entire general body after careful study of the draft of its constitution, an informed discussion and thorough debate, only, after which a democratic consensus on the issue be taken. Until such time no one can claim to know our opinions or speak for us.

We respect Mistree’s right to his own opinion and do not doubt his intention. However, he cannot claim to speak for us all. He can at best claim to speak for himself and the individuals with whom he is acquainted and whose personal opinions he knows for sure. He cannot speak for an anjuman to whom he is a complete stranger and who are strangers to him.

We request you to kindly keep our anjuman out of all these controversies and please not hold us responsible for the opionions and actions of people we do not know.

We assure you that when the time comes, we shall discuss all aspects of the issue and reach an informed and intelligent decision. Our anjuman is quite capable of independent thought and intelligent debate.

Freddy Nanji, Rukshana Nanji, Jamshed K. Mehta, V. J. Nanji, M. R. Bharucha, Jamshed Kanga, Zareen C. Mehta

According to Parsiana sources one of the main grouses of the Belgaum Anjuman is purportedly not hearing officially from the Federation secretariat. The suggestion that Belgaum be represented at the Federation meet by one of its resident members was dismissed as untenable on the basis that he/she would not be able to hold his/her ground against the strong pro-world body lobby there. It was suggested that a general fear psychosis prevails on the issue where a few people are in control with others signing as instructed.

Parsiana’s attempts to contact Kapadia on the telephone to seek an authentic description of the meeting were unsuccessful. On our first call, when we got through to Kapadia, she said the timing was inconvenient. When we called again in the evening as instructed the lady avoided identifying herself and tersely read the address: "B for Belgaum, C for Camp, 134 Camp, Belgaum 590001” and told us to write there.