Editorial Viewpoint
For whom the bells toll
As the tempo of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship elec-tions picks up so do the allegations and vilifications. Not only are the candidates targeted but their sup-porters and all others involved with the electoral process.
At the all-candidates meet at Khareghat Colony on September 9, 2008 the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) members laun-ched a diatribe against the president elect for the elections, Rustom Hor-mazdiyar.
A BPP electoral veteran of close to 30 years, the octogenarian former company secretary has served the community honorarily. Nor has there been any allegation of impropriety ever leveled against him and his scrutinizers in all the elections he has presided over.
He is one of the very few people who have turned over a flat in Cusrow Baug to the N. N. and R. N. Wadia Trusts without seeking or securing any monetary compensation. His wife, Jiny, died on December 3, 2000 and as per her wishes he surrendered the flat to the Trusts in March 2001. The BPP which manages the colony along with the Wadia trusts earned around 75 lakh rupees from the new tenant who occupied the premises.
His intervention in the charity commissioner’s case to ensure that justice was done to the 900 appli-cants on the BPP waiting list for housing apparently earned him the ire of WAPIZ candidate Shirin Choksey who was vociferously repre-sented by lawyer Sohrab Parakh at the Khareghat Colony meet. Parakh’s broadside, and that of his supporters and opponents, set the tone for the first 30 minutes of rowdiness in the meeting.
The BPP nevertheless subsequ-ently endorsed Hormazdiyar’s ap-pointment by a five to one margin with trustee Dinshaw Mehta repor-tedly opposing the selection. The BPP elections scheme provides that “the trustees shall appoint a Parsi to preside over such elections.”
Another unfortunate salvo was launched against Mehta and his electoral ally Maneck Davar over allocation of a flat by the BPP to Davar. An article by “Team Jame” in the September 14, 2008 issue of the Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly alleged the flat was given free to Davar at the behest of Mehta.
While on paper it may appear so, often payments are made through circuitous routes to avoid legal complications. This way the trust receives its dues and no apparent breach of the law is committed. It is difficult to prove one’s innocence but the fact that six other trustees gave their consent to the allocation implies the BPP received its dues. There is no other reason why the six should have accommodated Mehta and Davar, more so when Mehta was and is often at odds with several of his co-trustees.
All this of course is par for the course in electioneering. Mehta has alleged that his erstwhile friend Berjis Desai favors conversion and a cre-matorium at Doongerwadi. But what is said privately in jest to tease or instigate someone does not neces-sarily translate into community policy. People in the thick of Parsi politics know that one has to abide by the trust deeds and court judgments. Change has to have a moral and legal justification. It cannot be merely willed.
Desai is the founder of the Adult Franchise for Progress (AFP) whose panel of candidates includes indivi-duals like noted lawyer Nadir Modi, trust management expert Noshir Dadrawala and The Bombay Sama-char chairman and managing director Muncherji Cama, all of whom are orthodox.
The WAPIZ attack on Modi who saved the Mancherji Joshi Parsi Colony at Dadar from slipping out of community hands is deplorable. Instead of expressing gratitude for the considerable time, money and effort spared by Modi to ensure that the 100 or so buildings in the Colony covered by a covenant continued to be occupied by Parsis/Iranis, WAPIZ alleged in their weekly WAPIZ Page on September 12, 2008 published in the Free Press Journal that “Nadir Modi has no time or inclination to fight and ‘save’ the Dadar Parsi Colony.”
That plus the outburst at both the Palamkote Hall meeting of the AFP and the all-candidates meet at Khareghat Colony brings to mind the unseemly behavior of WAPIZ at other community events.
Under one pretext or the other WAPIZ held up universal adult franchise (UAF) for the BPP elections for two years. While publicly stating they favored UAF in the courts, their lawyers lobbied for the old anjuman committee system as WAPIZ had managed to pack the body with their supporters.
At the meetings of the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India, WAPIZ members represented anjumans with whom they had little or no connection so they could attend the gatherings and use them as a public platform. None of the WAPIZ members held elected community offices. Using a loophole in the rules and regulations they managed to convince rogue anjumans to nominate them as representatives. Thus Yazdi Desai represented three different anjumans at three different meetings. Do we want such people who undermine every public norm to govern the community? This is a question voters must ask themselves while casting their ballots in the first three weekends of this October.
The uproar at the Federation meeting in Ahmedabad in December 2004, the subsequent outburst at the all-India association’s meetings thereafter, the calumny heaped on their real and imagined adversaries through the WAPIZ Page, their opposition to the formation of a truly representative world body, all raise grave doubts as to their worthiness as future trustees.
The fact that WAPIZ candidate Choksey who probably does not even know Hormazdiyar yet allowed her name to be used by Parakh to vociferously object to his appoint-ment, means the WAPIZ tradition of the means justifying the ends remains.
But electioneering is the silly season. Anything and everything goes. With 32 candidates in the fray (legal tax expert Sohrab Dastur of the AFP panel dropped out after his wife fell grievously ill) it is not possible to know the background, character and objectives of each them in a short span of time. Several of them are newcomers to the political scene. One would have to observe them over a course of time to ascertain their suitability as trustee material.
The main contest however is between the AFP seven, WAPIZ four, Dinshaw Mehta, Jimmy Mistry and Arnavaz Mistry. Out of these 14, seven are to be elected. The final decision vests with the entire adult community. That’s how it should be.
At the all-candidates meet at Khareghat Colony on September 9, 2008 the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) members laun-ched a diatribe against the president elect for the elections, Rustom Hor-mazdiyar.
A BPP electoral veteran of close to 30 years, the octogenarian former company secretary has served the community honorarily. Nor has there been any allegation of impropriety ever leveled against him and his scrutinizers in all the elections he has presided over.
He is one of the very few people who have turned over a flat in Cusrow Baug to the N. N. and R. N. Wadia Trusts without seeking or securing any monetary compensation. His wife, Jiny, died on December 3, 2000 and as per her wishes he surrendered the flat to the Trusts in March 2001. The BPP which manages the colony along with the Wadia trusts earned around 75 lakh rupees from the new tenant who occupied the premises.
His intervention in the charity commissioner’s case to ensure that justice was done to the 900 appli-cants on the BPP waiting list for housing apparently earned him the ire of WAPIZ candidate Shirin Choksey who was vociferously repre-sented by lawyer Sohrab Parakh at the Khareghat Colony meet. Parakh’s broadside, and that of his supporters and opponents, set the tone for the first 30 minutes of rowdiness in the meeting.
The BPP nevertheless subsequ-ently endorsed Hormazdiyar’s ap-pointment by a five to one margin with trustee Dinshaw Mehta repor-tedly opposing the selection. The BPP elections scheme provides that “the trustees shall appoint a Parsi to preside over such elections.”
Another unfortunate salvo was launched against Mehta and his electoral ally Maneck Davar over allocation of a flat by the BPP to Davar. An article by “Team Jame” in the September 14, 2008 issue of the Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly alleged the flat was given free to Davar at the behest of Mehta.
While on paper it may appear so, often payments are made through circuitous routes to avoid legal complications. This way the trust receives its dues and no apparent breach of the law is committed. It is difficult to prove one’s innocence but the fact that six other trustees gave their consent to the allocation implies the BPP received its dues. There is no other reason why the six should have accommodated Mehta and Davar, more so when Mehta was and is often at odds with several of his co-trustees.
All this of course is par for the course in electioneering. Mehta has alleged that his erstwhile friend Berjis Desai favors conversion and a cre-matorium at Doongerwadi. But what is said privately in jest to tease or instigate someone does not neces-sarily translate into community policy. People in the thick of Parsi politics know that one has to abide by the trust deeds and court judgments. Change has to have a moral and legal justification. It cannot be merely willed.
Desai is the founder of the Adult Franchise for Progress (AFP) whose panel of candidates includes indivi-duals like noted lawyer Nadir Modi, trust management expert Noshir Dadrawala and The Bombay Sama-char chairman and managing director Muncherji Cama, all of whom are orthodox.
The WAPIZ attack on Modi who saved the Mancherji Joshi Parsi Colony at Dadar from slipping out of community hands is deplorable. Instead of expressing gratitude for the considerable time, money and effort spared by Modi to ensure that the 100 or so buildings in the Colony covered by a covenant continued to be occupied by Parsis/Iranis, WAPIZ alleged in their weekly WAPIZ Page on September 12, 2008 published in the Free Press Journal that “Nadir Modi has no time or inclination to fight and ‘save’ the Dadar Parsi Colony.”
That plus the outburst at both the Palamkote Hall meeting of the AFP and the all-candidates meet at Khareghat Colony brings to mind the unseemly behavior of WAPIZ at other community events.
Under one pretext or the other WAPIZ held up universal adult franchise (UAF) for the BPP elections for two years. While publicly stating they favored UAF in the courts, their lawyers lobbied for the old anjuman committee system as WAPIZ had managed to pack the body with their supporters.
At the meetings of the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India, WAPIZ members represented anjumans with whom they had little or no connection so they could attend the gatherings and use them as a public platform. None of the WAPIZ members held elected community offices. Using a loophole in the rules and regulations they managed to convince rogue anjumans to nominate them as representatives. Thus Yazdi Desai represented three different anjumans at three different meetings. Do we want such people who undermine every public norm to govern the community? This is a question voters must ask themselves while casting their ballots in the first three weekends of this October.
The uproar at the Federation meeting in Ahmedabad in December 2004, the subsequent outburst at the all-India association’s meetings thereafter, the calumny heaped on their real and imagined adversaries through the WAPIZ Page, their opposition to the formation of a truly representative world body, all raise grave doubts as to their worthiness as future trustees.
The fact that WAPIZ candidate Choksey who probably does not even know Hormazdiyar yet allowed her name to be used by Parakh to vociferously object to his appoint-ment, means the WAPIZ tradition of the means justifying the ends remains.
But electioneering is the silly season. Anything and everything goes. With 32 candidates in the fray (legal tax expert Sohrab Dastur of the AFP panel dropped out after his wife fell grievously ill) it is not possible to know the background, character and objectives of each them in a short span of time. Several of them are newcomers to the political scene. One would have to observe them over a course of time to ascertain their suitability as trustee material.
The main contest however is between the AFP seven, WAPIZ four, Dinshaw Mehta, Jimmy Mistry and Arnavaz Mistry. Out of these 14, seven are to be elected. The final decision vests with the entire adult community. That’s how it should be.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive