Congressional chaos

The month of November has seen the most turbulent 30 days in the community’s recent history. One shock wave after the other sent Parsis and Zoroastrians across the world reeling with dismay, anger and finally outrage. First came the police complaint by four Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trustees against their chairman, followed by an application to the Charity Commissioner’s (CC) office to oust him from trusteeship. Then came the four to three vote to cancel the 10th World Zoroastrian Congress (10WZC) to be held in Bombay in end December. So great was the international outcry that the four trustees had to reverse their ill considered decision on the global meet.
Of course the four, Arnavaz Mistry, Jimmy Mistry, Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai extracted their pound of flesh by making the decision conditional on their three co-trustees — chairman Dinshaw Mehta, Armaity Tirandaz and Muncherji Cama — recusing themselves from the management of the Congress and also from presiding at the meet. The three are reportedly agreeable to do so in order to salvage the event.
The only winners in this sordid saga are the community members who rose up as one and almost forced the seven trustees to arrive at a solution. They were not prepared to let the Congress be sabotaged by a few recalcitrant, squabbling unrepentant, egoistic individuals. Meetings were held, emails exchanged, solutions suggested, other alternatives examined. Even the Congress sponsor Dr Cyrus Poonawalla, the Poona based billionaire, wrote to the trustees urging them to salvage the event. He noted he had received a barrage of mails protesting the cancellation. As insular as the BPP is, they could not totally disregard public opinion.
A group of six former BPP trustees, Minoo Shroff, Jamsheed Kanga (see "The end of Camelot,” on page 29), Dadi Engineer, Dinshaw Tamboly, Maneck Engineer and Burjor Antia sought a meeting with all the current trustees "to attempt to resolve this issue internally.” But the four complainants asked for a separate meeting with the erstwhile trustees before any joint meeting could be held.
They informed the erstwhile trustees that while they chose to resign claiming it was impossible to work with Mehta, the present occupants of the office took Mehta on. "You were gentlemen, we are ruffians,” one of the four is reported to have remarked.
But in the rough-and-tumble, all the BPP’s ambitious plans have been stymied.
In addition to preparing for the Congress, the trustees will make the rounds of police stations, courts, media houses and lawyers’ offices. The Congress see-saw temporarily overshadowed the historic police complaint lodged by the four against Mehta and the CC application seeking to oust him.
The question arises how two of the four trustees, Jimmy Mistry and Yazdi Desai will find the time for the Congress preparations when their attendance at trusteeship meetings is so dismal (see "Trustees on Tuedays” in this issue). The answer may vest with the spouses of Mistree and Desai. Firoza Punthakey Mistree has ably and efficiently assisted with the holding of The Everlasting Flame historic exhibition in London this October-December as well as the planned exhibition in Bombay to coincide with the holding of the Congress. Anahita Desai has demonstrated her organizational skills and propensity for hard work both when assisting Yazdi in the BPP and during her unsuccessful trusteeship attempt against Cama. She lost largely because the community did not want a husband-wife duo on the board, more so when both belong to the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ).
The more troubling issue remains whether the trustees will try and push their fundamentalist agenda at the global gathering. Both Mistree and Desai are hard core traditionalists. Jimmy Mistry, like Mehta, is not that ideologically inclined and will set his sails depending on which way the wind is blowing. Arnavaz Mistry is more middle-of-the-road but may not hold much sway. But to keep her on their side, Mistry, Mistree and Desai will have to bear her views in mind if reshaping the program. Her unexpected switch of loyalties is what enabled the trio to triumph.
Much of the Congress organization has been set in place, the program and the list of speakers has been made public. The room for maneuvering will be limited but the meet is bound to bear a different imprint from what Mehta and Maneck Davar, the honorary secretary of the Congress Organizing Committee had envisioned.
At one stage, well-wishers suggested the Global Working Group (GWG) which decides on which country gets to hold the Congress take over the management of the Bombay Congress. But one should not forget it was the GWG which in the first place gave in to the BPP bullying tactics and awarded Bombay the meet which should rightly have gone to Singapore. The Parsis of the small South East Asian city-state had come prepared with a full dossier including funding from the Singapore government. Instead Bombay, whose bid was scribbled on a piece of paper provided by a GWG member, was allotted the Congress.
The GWG needs to get its act together. There should be a binding contract that whoever is awarded the meet is obligated to hold it barring some natural calamity or bankruptcy. Just the whims of a majority should not be permitted to jeopardize four years of planning and anticipation. The holding of a Congress entails people booking airline tickets and hotels, adjusting schedules, preparing papers if invited to speak and so on. A cancellation at the last minute is disastrous. Also the norms for bidding, the deadlines for receiving offers, all should be laid down and enforced. Then only will people’s faith in future congresses be restored.