BPP elections

I hope the much-awaited results of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship elections have opened your eyes to how discredited, alienated and sadly out of touch the Parsi Press has been to the aspirations and opinions of the mainstream Parsi community in the stronghold of Bombay.

We, the average Parsis, are not the imbeciles and antiquated fossils that the Press has arrogantly made us out to be. We are educated and dynamic individuals and parents who wish more than anything to protect and pass on our religious heritage to our next generation. We believe that along with the privileges that we enjoy of being Parsi Zoroastrians, we are also duty bound to fulfill our responsibilities towards maintaining our traditions, in much the same way our forefathers fought to preserve them for us.

We are more than aware that the so-called "advocates of liberal change” that you have championed with such obsessive zeal are nothing more than angry and embittered individuals who, for their own personal circumstances, have spearheaded all sorts of movements to disturb and break community harmony. They are far from committed or even remotely interested in maintaining the blessing of being a Parsi Zoroastrian.

Shame on you gentlemen, for calling yourself the Parsi Press — you do not know the first thing about the ethics of your noble profession and even less about the community you claim to represent.

Our deepest gratitude to those on the new BPP board who weathered your nasty and vituperative diatribes, no doubt at much personal cost. The spiritual protection of the ancient ones have surely shielded and kept them.

The community has spoken — and we hope the Press has the sensibility to comprehend the clear message.

MAHRUKH COOPER

Dubai, UAE

hoshi@eim.ae

The historic Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) elections fought under universal adult franchise has given us seven trustees out of a field of 32 candidates. Only two of the seven have previous experience of being a trustee. A positive outcome is that the panel includes a lady, Arnavaz Mistry, and a young person, Jimmy Mistry. With four independents, two from the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis and one from the Adult Franchise for Progress, each and every segment of the community is well represented. The electorate has not voted for any particular panel or segment.

As a non-Bombayite, I have not been directly exposed to the rigorous campaigning undertaken by the candidates. But from reports in the media, this election was one of the most high profile our community has seen for a while. One can argue that the lack of a code of conduct enabled candidates to spend huge amounts on freebies and publicity, but the most deplorable part of the elections was personal attacks on candidates on both the panels as well as on prominent independents. Spending on publicity is fine as long as you do not malign someone else without concrete evidence to support your claim.

By an unofficial estimate each prominent candidate seems to have spent two to three crore rupees on the election. This is a huge amount and even though successful candidates may justify such spending, it should not be allowed in future. The new trustees should bring into effect a code of conduct for future elections which includes aspects like the maximum expenditure allowed, declaration of personal wealth, eschewing false personal allegations, etc.

The results showed that many candidates got just a few hundred votes out of the approximately 13,000 votes cast, which is less than 10 percent. One such candidate who polled around 200 votes even advertised in the newspapers thanking all his voters and supporters! I also observed that the manifestos of most candidates concentrated on issues like housing, dakhmenashini, etc. I agree that these are among the most controversial issues affecting our community, especially in Bombay, but there are a host of other issues that require equal if not more attention by the trustees. Matters like the increase in interfaith marriages, greater dependence on salaried jobs instead of entrepreneurship and other youth related issues were not adequately dealt with by most candidates.

An unofficial estimate proclaims the BPP to be one of the richest bodies in Bombay having assets close to Rs 5,000 crore. Though the Punchayet does incur considerable expenditure each month on operational and other expenses, a lot remains to be done. There is ample room for improvement in the image of the BPP and in the manner in which it deals with the community.

The trustees are only custodians of the BPP and its huge funds, not the owners. In recent times it has been generally believed that incumbents have minted money after becoming trustees. The BPP should publish a detailed record of the declaration of personal wealth and holdings of a person before he/she becomes a trustee and at the end of each year of his/her term.

In the past trustees were accused of behaving in either an orthodox or a reformist manner. The seven elected this time are known to have a more traditionalistic approach rather than reformist. Let us hope that they work as a cohesive unit and are able to produce results on pending issues affecting the community.

ARIZ K. BOKDAWALLA

Ahmedabad

ariz_bokdawalla@idbi.co.in

The results of the recently concluded Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) elections are bad news. Introspection indicates that this mess is the outcome of the universal adult franchise (UAF) scheme. The once infallible body has been further reduced to a "Bartered Parsi Punchayet.” Subjective votes for notes by the majority, gullible, poor masses and the way to a voter’s heart through his belly (not grey matter) have been abundantly amplified by the results.

Where did the cerebral voters disappear on election day(s)? The objectively thinking classes were outnumbered, leading to unlikely winners by division of votes, as happens in every political election in our country. Nothing could be further from what the original settlors had envisaged when they entrusted the charitable administration of their vast properties and wealth to a band of handpicked BPP trustees for the welfare of the community.

Progressive Parsis? Unfortunately not, on the basis of this fiasco! Only regressive, amnesia suffering colony bawas, unappreciative at that, could neglect a thoroughbred like Nadir Modi. Optimal was displaced to favor the worst. The main Parsi Press was so caught up with and concentrated all its energies on demolishing a single allied target that it foresaw no menace from any other quarter. It failed in its duty to highlight the negative antecedents detrimental to the interest of this august office that were brought to its notice by members of the public about some of the candidates. Had the local community media cared to give equal coverage to the moral fiber of all contestants, the freak selections would never have occurred.

Unwarranted UAF has done to our once august association what democratic rights have done to our national governance. It has sealed the fate of our community’s established organization from a charitable trust association to a group of seasoned builders’ lobby and hypocritical religious bigots alongside a forever piggy-backing boneless specimen; with the exception of a duo.

Ironically, those who won UAF for the community have themselves ended as losers in the fray, which is beyond comprehension of observers. Unfortunately, the entire well-intended exercise by the overzealous Adult Franchise for Progress think tank has hopelessly backfired. Their raison d’etre — to oust the undesirables and purge the new BPP board of such influence — has come to naught. One whom the donors and anjuman register voters had judiciously and at great pains voted out of the BPP in the past is back in the saddle by default.

Having secured the resignation of outgoing trustees, why wasn’t the time-tested prevalent voting system adhered to? Legal advisors should have on principle asserted that past trustees who had resigned or been ousted from the board would not be eligible for this initial election under UAF. This could have saved our community anguish at the voters’ choice. It’s just a matter of time before voters rue their blunder and in the not too distant future the beneficiaries will realize to their dismay that nothing has changed in the BPP governance.

MICKIE SORABJEE

nashmick@hotmail.com