Editorial Viewpoint
The road ahead
The question many astounded voters asked after the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship election results became known was why did the Adult Franchise for Progress (AFP) lose? How could seven highly qualified and well connected individuals not be elected to office by such an enlightened community?
Many people believe it is due to the system of universal adult franchise (UAF) being introduced. Voters were swayed by populist policies promised by other candidates, they said. The community is basically orthodox and so voted for those who claimed religious institutions were under attack, others explained.
Some observers claimed the AFP candidates were too far removed from the mass of the community and, therefore, could not communicate effectively with the middle class and other financially less privileged voters. Perhaps some of these factors carried weight.
The last Anjuman Committee formed in 2006 had been packed by supporters of the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and then sitting BPP trustee and now chairman Dinshaw Mehta.
So even if UAF had not been introduced, Mehta would have won with WAPIZ support. Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai also would in all probability have been elected as and when vacancies arose. So at least three out of the seven newly elected trustees could have won under either system.
While Mehta and Mistree were perceived to be unpopular with a large section of the community, they apparently commanded a loyal vote bank. Mehta is indeed a friend in need and those who benefited from his largesse or assistance stood by him. In l4 years as a trustee and in the l4 years prior to that, Mehta has been a hands-on community worker. But his obstinacy and quick temper, coupled with an acerbic tongue replete with expletives have earned him many detractors. Mention his name and it is vilified instantly.
Mistree started out as a teacher-preacher of Zoroastrianism in the mid 1970s and gained a large following among the young. But in later years when he said he was going “political” he became more dogmatic and intolerant of any opposition. People alleged he viewed himself as a spiritual leader, hence the moniker “Messiah.”
At an interfaith conference another Zoroastrian speaker recalled how Mistree insisted that only he should recite the Ashem Vohu and Yatha Ahu Vairyo prayers as his pronunciation alone was correct. His constant refrain that all studies, statistics, reports and analyses prepared by others are either distorted, manipulated or incorrect and that only the figures he cites (most times without any references) are correct, has earned him the ire of intellectuals, academicians and demographers amongst others.
Mistree and WAPIZ have functioned as an opposition party over the last three years, stonewalling nearly all worthwhile community projects where they were not involved in the decision making. Thus while assisting to attain heritage status for fire temples in Bombay, they opposed plans to grant a similar type of status to Udvada town, the most revered Parsi/Irani pilgrimage site. While espousing the cause of greenery at Doongerwadi and elsewhere, they keep silent at the indiscriminate felling of thousands of trees to feed the fires in agiaries and atash behrams.
Similarly WAPIZ talks of augmenting housing in the community, yet opposed construction of 70 flats for financially disadvantaged Parsis/Iranis at Dadysett Atash Behram. The seven crore rupee project was a gift from the Mistry family of Shapoorji Pallonji and Company fame. WAPIZ opposed adult franchise in the courts of law allegedly with the tacit support, at times, of Mehta.
Mehta himself is facing charges of impropriety before the charity commissioner’s office. The Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly tore into Mehta and to a lesser degree Mistree during the elections. The Bombay Samachar also attacked Mistree. Parsiana did not espouse the views of the orthodox and slammed Mistree for presenting exaggerated and fictitious figures of the international Zoroastrian population.
Still Mehta, Mistree and WAPIZ founder trustee Yazdi Desai (known for his endless litigation against construction of the Hilla Towers building at Parel) won. And at a point in time in the counting of votes, their associates Shirin Choksey and Bomi Kavina were among the top seven contenders out of a field of 32 candidates. Both Choksey and Kavina are relative newcomers to the community political scene.
Why did they all do so well? Why did Mistree and Desai receive more votes than any of the seven outstanding AFP candidates?
One reason of course is that Mistree, despite all his affectations and wily ways, is a good speaker and he has a basic knowledge of the religion. Like Rustom Tirandaz, a former BPP trustee who lost twice when seeking reelection, Mistree has the gift of the gab. Tirandaz won not because he had an outstanding record as a trustee earlier (on the contrary he was viewed as loquacious and disruptive coming to meetings unprepared and even taking personal calls on his mobile when meetings were in progress). But he could reach out to voters, talk their language, appeal to their sense of justice and fair play.
As for the other three winners, social worker Arnavaz Mistry, interior designer and developer Jimmy Mistry and charity management expert Noshir Dadrawala, they were elected on their track record of community service. Arnavaz and Dadrawala of course have been in the field for many years while Jimmy is a newcomer but a very impressive one.
Arnavaz had no adversaries. Dadrawala of course was anathema to Mistree and Desai for ditching them after agreeing to stand for trusteeship elections against WAPIZ’s enemy number one, then BPP trustee Dinshaw Tamboly. Like Mehta and Mistree, Jimmy also was reviled by many as being opportunistic and guileful. Other than that there were few other grouses against him.
The AFP candidates in contrast appeared sober and intellectual. Tax expert Sohrab Dastur could have proven to be a big draw for the AFP but he dropped out of the race due to his wife’s ill health. The AFP’s initial thrust on housing failed to draw voters since most Parsis/Iranis are housed.
One tactical error that AFP made was to oppose encashment of flats in Parsi colonies. They termed this commercialization of charity. With 6,000 flats in the BPP and Wadia charities’ control, a large number of Parsis would have lost out on an opportunity to shift elsewhere, either in India or abroad.
As Mehta rightly pointed out this policy would result in endless litigation as tenants would illegally induct others into their flats for a lower consideration and then leave. Already the BPP has over l00 Rent Act cases in the Bombay Small Causes Court. And furthermore when all other tenants in Bombay are entitled to legally accept payment for vacating a flat with the landlords’ consent (the landlord receives 33 percent to 50 percent of the value of the premises) why deny the right to Parsis/Iranis?
The community’s greater perceived and imagined fear was the advent of non-Parsis into fire temples and construction of a crematorium at Doongerwadi.
By the time AFP changed track, the opposition had capitalized on that dread.
Several of the AFP candidates are not well known to the community. For them to now withdraw from the Zoroastrian scene would be a great loss. Having come together there is no reason why they cannot comprise a think tank for the community.
With the addition of people like social scientist Dr Armaity Desai they could work wonders. Their views on community issues, disseminated through the media, seminars and public talks would complement the work done by the BPP and other bodies. It is for people like AFP founder Berjis Desai and members of the Alert Zoroastrians Association to pick up the strands and create a new and constructive forum.
The community could then win back the opportunity they unwittingly lost.
Many people believe it is due to the system of universal adult franchise (UAF) being introduced. Voters were swayed by populist policies promised by other candidates, they said. The community is basically orthodox and so voted for those who claimed religious institutions were under attack, others explained.
Some observers claimed the AFP candidates were too far removed from the mass of the community and, therefore, could not communicate effectively with the middle class and other financially less privileged voters. Perhaps some of these factors carried weight.
The last Anjuman Committee formed in 2006 had been packed by supporters of the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) and then sitting BPP trustee and now chairman Dinshaw Mehta.
So even if UAF had not been introduced, Mehta would have won with WAPIZ support. Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai also would in all probability have been elected as and when vacancies arose. So at least three out of the seven newly elected trustees could have won under either system.
While Mehta and Mistree were perceived to be unpopular with a large section of the community, they apparently commanded a loyal vote bank. Mehta is indeed a friend in need and those who benefited from his largesse or assistance stood by him. In l4 years as a trustee and in the l4 years prior to that, Mehta has been a hands-on community worker. But his obstinacy and quick temper, coupled with an acerbic tongue replete with expletives have earned him many detractors. Mention his name and it is vilified instantly.
Mistree started out as a teacher-preacher of Zoroastrianism in the mid 1970s and gained a large following among the young. But in later years when he said he was going “political” he became more dogmatic and intolerant of any opposition. People alleged he viewed himself as a spiritual leader, hence the moniker “Messiah.”
At an interfaith conference another Zoroastrian speaker recalled how Mistree insisted that only he should recite the Ashem Vohu and Yatha Ahu Vairyo prayers as his pronunciation alone was correct. His constant refrain that all studies, statistics, reports and analyses prepared by others are either distorted, manipulated or incorrect and that only the figures he cites (most times without any references) are correct, has earned him the ire of intellectuals, academicians and demographers amongst others.
Mistree and WAPIZ have functioned as an opposition party over the last three years, stonewalling nearly all worthwhile community projects where they were not involved in the decision making. Thus while assisting to attain heritage status for fire temples in Bombay, they opposed plans to grant a similar type of status to Udvada town, the most revered Parsi/Irani pilgrimage site. While espousing the cause of greenery at Doongerwadi and elsewhere, they keep silent at the indiscriminate felling of thousands of trees to feed the fires in agiaries and atash behrams.
Similarly WAPIZ talks of augmenting housing in the community, yet opposed construction of 70 flats for financially disadvantaged Parsis/Iranis at Dadysett Atash Behram. The seven crore rupee project was a gift from the Mistry family of Shapoorji Pallonji and Company fame. WAPIZ opposed adult franchise in the courts of law allegedly with the tacit support, at times, of Mehta.
Mehta himself is facing charges of impropriety before the charity commissioner’s office. The Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly tore into Mehta and to a lesser degree Mistree during the elections. The Bombay Samachar also attacked Mistree. Parsiana did not espouse the views of the orthodox and slammed Mistree for presenting exaggerated and fictitious figures of the international Zoroastrian population.
Still Mehta, Mistree and WAPIZ founder trustee Yazdi Desai (known for his endless litigation against construction of the Hilla Towers building at Parel) won. And at a point in time in the counting of votes, their associates Shirin Choksey and Bomi Kavina were among the top seven contenders out of a field of 32 candidates. Both Choksey and Kavina are relative newcomers to the community political scene.
Why did they all do so well? Why did Mistree and Desai receive more votes than any of the seven outstanding AFP candidates?
One reason of course is that Mistree, despite all his affectations and wily ways, is a good speaker and he has a basic knowledge of the religion. Like Rustom Tirandaz, a former BPP trustee who lost twice when seeking reelection, Mistree has the gift of the gab. Tirandaz won not because he had an outstanding record as a trustee earlier (on the contrary he was viewed as loquacious and disruptive coming to meetings unprepared and even taking personal calls on his mobile when meetings were in progress). But he could reach out to voters, talk their language, appeal to their sense of justice and fair play.
As for the other three winners, social worker Arnavaz Mistry, interior designer and developer Jimmy Mistry and charity management expert Noshir Dadrawala, they were elected on their track record of community service. Arnavaz and Dadrawala of course have been in the field for many years while Jimmy is a newcomer but a very impressive one.
Arnavaz had no adversaries. Dadrawala of course was anathema to Mistree and Desai for ditching them after agreeing to stand for trusteeship elections against WAPIZ’s enemy number one, then BPP trustee Dinshaw Tamboly. Like Mehta and Mistree, Jimmy also was reviled by many as being opportunistic and guileful. Other than that there were few other grouses against him.
The AFP candidates in contrast appeared sober and intellectual. Tax expert Sohrab Dastur could have proven to be a big draw for the AFP but he dropped out of the race due to his wife’s ill health. The AFP’s initial thrust on housing failed to draw voters since most Parsis/Iranis are housed.
One tactical error that AFP made was to oppose encashment of flats in Parsi colonies. They termed this commercialization of charity. With 6,000 flats in the BPP and Wadia charities’ control, a large number of Parsis would have lost out on an opportunity to shift elsewhere, either in India or abroad.
As Mehta rightly pointed out this policy would result in endless litigation as tenants would illegally induct others into their flats for a lower consideration and then leave. Already the BPP has over l00 Rent Act cases in the Bombay Small Causes Court. And furthermore when all other tenants in Bombay are entitled to legally accept payment for vacating a flat with the landlords’ consent (the landlord receives 33 percent to 50 percent of the value of the premises) why deny the right to Parsis/Iranis?
The community’s greater perceived and imagined fear was the advent of non-Parsis into fire temples and construction of a crematorium at Doongerwadi.
By the time AFP changed track, the opposition had capitalized on that dread.
Several of the AFP candidates are not well known to the community. For them to now withdraw from the Zoroastrian scene would be a great loss. Having come together there is no reason why they cannot comprise a think tank for the community.
With the addition of people like social scientist Dr Armaity Desai they could work wonders. Their views on community issues, disseminated through the media, seminars and public talks would complement the work done by the BPP and other bodies. It is for people like AFP founder Berjis Desai and members of the Alert Zoroastrians Association to pick up the strands and create a new and constructive forum.
The community could then win back the opportunity they unwittingly lost.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive