Editorial Viewpoint
"When the moon is in the seventh house"
Controversies appear to have a life of their own. Just when one believes matters are settled and normalcy has returned, another wrangle surfaces. Like an untamed cancer spreading its mutated cells and wreaking havoc, so also community animosity lives and thrives on the body politic.
Barely had the curtain fallen on the ill-starred saga of the resignation and subsequent rejoining of the four trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and the fears of an administrator being appointed by the state’s charity commissioner, then marginal groups joined in the fray. The World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and the Alert Zoroastrians’ Association (AZA), both opposite ends of the political spectrum, took the resignation drama to court and elsewhere.
Their apparent end game? To have an administrator appointed till fresh trusteeship elections can be held! WAPIZ wants the court to ban the four trustees from rejoining the board while AZA reportedly wants the charity commissioner to oust all six trustees.
“The appointment of the administrator will be bitterly challenged before the High Court and the Supreme Court,” writes The Bombay Samachar columnist and noted solicitor Berjis Desai in his “Parsi Tari Arsi” column of July 23, 2006. This means most of the community’s resources and time will be tied up in litigation.
A lay person who has the misfortune to be involved in a court case knows the mental and financial toll litigation involves. As noted jurist and nominated Member of Parliament Fali Nariman noted in an article in The Indian Express (December 8, 2005), “Courts appear to operate in a world of their own, without apparent regard to the needs of the litigating public. For the latter there is only the solace of the poet’s (John Milton) exhortation: ‘They also serve, who only stand and wait.’”
It is the lawyers who fight the battles, not the trustees or the other litigants. Depending on the brief the jurist prepare, the arguments they put forth, the reasoning they present, the judges interpretation of the contentions and the case law, a decision will be given. That decision will then be referred to a larger bench or a higher court in appeal by the aggrieved party and so forth.
In short, the BPP, WAPIZ, AZA and the community at large will be hapless bystanders who can only watch the courtroom drama unfold and hope that some judge/s will rule in their favor.
In the meanwhile, every major and minor community issue will suffer from diminished attention. As the litigants pour over the legal briefs, the judgments and prepare their strategies and evaluate their legal options, all other matters will get short shrift. Is this what the community wants? Is this what we elected trustees to do?
In our Milestones column of this issue we have cited statistics referring to the Bombay Parsi community. There has been a drop of around 40 percent in the city’s Parsi population over 45 years. From a peak of 70,065 in 1960 the number has fallen to around 43,241 in 2005.
Even more disturbing is the predomination of male babies. In the last five years 2001 to 2005, 577 boys were born as versus 505 girls, a difference of 72. How will these boys find Parsi spouses? Will the interfaith marriage percentage rise above the five year 32 percent average mark?
Do we continue to bar children of interfaith marriages from community institutions or events? Do we treat the non-Parsi spouses like pariahs or make them feel welcome?
Of the 43,241 Parsis residing in Bombay, around half live in BPP-Wadia trust housing. Who will occupy these flats when our numbers decline further? What plans do we make, what procedures rules and regulations are we to follow? If the allocation of two flats can lead to such factional community upheavals, what happens when the fate of 6,000 apartments is to be determined.
And who will venture to give thought to such weighty issues if e
Barely had the curtain fallen on the ill-starred saga of the resignation and subsequent rejoining of the four trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and the fears of an administrator being appointed by the state’s charity commissioner, then marginal groups joined in the fray. The World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and the Alert Zoroastrians’ Association (AZA), both opposite ends of the political spectrum, took the resignation drama to court and elsewhere.
Their apparent end game? To have an administrator appointed till fresh trusteeship elections can be held! WAPIZ wants the court to ban the four trustees from rejoining the board while AZA reportedly wants the charity commissioner to oust all six trustees.
“The appointment of the administrator will be bitterly challenged before the High Court and the Supreme Court,” writes The Bombay Samachar columnist and noted solicitor Berjis Desai in his “Parsi Tari Arsi” column of July 23, 2006. This means most of the community’s resources and time will be tied up in litigation.
A lay person who has the misfortune to be involved in a court case knows the mental and financial toll litigation involves. As noted jurist and nominated Member of Parliament Fali Nariman noted in an article in The Indian Express (December 8, 2005), “Courts appear to operate in a world of their own, without apparent regard to the needs of the litigating public. For the latter there is only the solace of the poet’s (John Milton) exhortation: ‘They also serve, who only stand and wait.’”
It is the lawyers who fight the battles, not the trustees or the other litigants. Depending on the brief the jurist prepare, the arguments they put forth, the reasoning they present, the judges interpretation of the contentions and the case law, a decision will be given. That decision will then be referred to a larger bench or a higher court in appeal by the aggrieved party and so forth.
In short, the BPP, WAPIZ, AZA and the community at large will be hapless bystanders who can only watch the courtroom drama unfold and hope that some judge/s will rule in their favor.
In the meanwhile, every major and minor community issue will suffer from diminished attention. As the litigants pour over the legal briefs, the judgments and prepare their strategies and evaluate their legal options, all other matters will get short shrift. Is this what the community wants? Is this what we elected trustees to do?
In our Milestones column of this issue we have cited statistics referring to the Bombay Parsi community. There has been a drop of around 40 percent in the city’s Parsi population over 45 years. From a peak of 70,065 in 1960 the number has fallen to around 43,241 in 2005.
Even more disturbing is the predomination of male babies. In the last five years 2001 to 2005, 577 boys were born as versus 505 girls, a difference of 72. How will these boys find Parsi spouses? Will the interfaith marriage percentage rise above the five year 32 percent average mark?
Do we continue to bar children of interfaith marriages from community institutions or events? Do we treat the non-Parsi spouses like pariahs or make them feel welcome?
Of the 43,241 Parsis residing in Bombay, around half live in BPP-Wadia trust housing. Who will occupy these flats when our numbers decline further? What plans do we make, what procedures rules and regulations are we to follow? If the allocation of two flats can lead to such factional community upheavals, what happens when the fate of 6,000 apartments is to be determined.
And who will venture to give thought to such weighty issues if e
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive