Theos-Talk Archives (May 2008 Message tt00699)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@...> wrote:

> As I said earlier, because of my own reasons, I am not supporting or
> rejecting any candidate in this election. However I am making 
analysis
> of statements made by different people in this election. 
> 
> > Documentary evidence showed that a supporter of John Algeo, 
Elvira 
> > Carbonell, who was working at the Secretary's Office at Adyar 
last 
> > December, compromised and tainted the nomination process by 
writing 
> > directly to General Council members, on 19 December 2007, to 
inform 
> > them that John Algeo had decided to accept nominations.
> 
> This view is not right in my opinion. Anybody who is willing to 
accept
> nominations can inform anybody at any time that he would be 
accepting
> nominations in next election. So I don't think nomination process is
> tainted due to above reason.


Anand,

Please see below an extract of Rule 10 (c) which establishes the 
procedure for the nomination process for the election of President of 
the TS:

"c) Any member of the Society in good standing, having been a member 
for at least ten consecutive years immediately preceding his 
nomination, may be nominated.

Each member of the General Council, who is a General Secretary, shall 
be entitled to make three nominations and shall consult his Governing 
Body before making nominations.

The President shall be entitled to make three nominations.

The Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer and each Additional Member 
of the General Council shall be entitled to make one nomination.

The nominator shall be responsible for ensuring that his nomination
(s) reaches the Secretary within ten weeks of the date of the call 
for nomination.

The nominee shall be responsible for notifying the Secretary, within 
the abovementioned period of his acceptance of nomination. One 
written consent shall suffice for all nominations for that nominee."


> > At least in France and in the US, voting took place under massive 
> > canvassing by the respective General Secretaries who blatantly 
> > favoured John Algeo as a candidate and  who depicted Radha 
Burnier, 
> > President of the Theosophical Society, as being in a state 
nearing 
> > mental decrepitude. 

> Who told you that canvassing for a candidate is wrong in democracy ?
> It is everybody's right to tell others why he supports certain
> candidate in the election and why he is rejecting certain candidate.
 
 
Please see extract of Rule 10 (e) below about what General 
Secretaries should inform their members about before they vote: 

"Each General Secretary, Regional Secretary, Organizing Secretary and 
Presidential Representative shall make known the names of the 
candidates and their biographical data to the members in his area and 
take the votes in accordance with the instructions in Appendix B to 
these Rules of the individual members on the rolls of his National 
Society or area of administration who have been members in good 
standing for two full years as on the date of the call for 
nominations, and shall communicate the results to the Secretary in 
accordance with the instructions given in Appendix B to these Rules."


> >There is no evidence whatsoever that either 
> > General Secretary distributed to the members in their Sections 
copies 
> > of the medical certificates issued by two doctors in India 
attesting 
> > to the President's recovery.
> 
> It is not compulsory that General Secretaries should distribute
> medical certificates of Radha to members. Tell me under which rule 
it is necessary.

One would think that at the least in the TS an international election 
should be fair to all candidates. That is what the Rules of the 
Society determine. If members in France and in the US were told, by 
their own General Secretaries, that Radha Burnier's mental state was 
one of "brain damage", "misfunctioning brain", "incoherence", etc., 
and since those GSs received copies of the medical certificates, 
which were sent to them by the Election Committee, attesting to the 
contrary, would it not be only fair and just that those GSs should 
pass that information to the members so that they could have an 
alternative view? 


> > Voting will close in most Sections at the end of this month or, 
at 
> > the latest, in the beginning of June. I have been approached by a 
> > leading member of the American Section to help in healing the 
present 
> > divisions within the Society. After considering her letter 
carefully, 
> > I have come to the conclusion that the only effective healing 
that 
> > can take place now is for the General Council of the TS or the 
> > international Executive Committee to conduct an independent 
inquiry 
> > into the election process as a whole, which includes the 
nomination 
> > process. 
> 
> Responsibility of conducting fair election and to manage all related
> things properly is chiefly of President and his/her administration.
> Now, if you are saying election process is not carried out properly,
> it is indirectly admitting that Radha and her administration has
> failed to conduct the fair election.


Please see the following extract of the Rules of the TS:

"Rule 10. Election of President

The procedure for election to the office of President shall be as 
follows:

(a) Seven months before the expiration of a President's term of 
office, or within three days of the office becoming vacant, the 
Executive Committee shall appoint a special Committee consisting of 
three members of The Theosophical Society in good standing including 
the Secretary, but excluding any candidate for the office of 
President, to carry out the election procedure as herein under 
detailed.

This Committee shall be known as the Election Committee and shall be 
answerable only to the Executive Committee."


Pedro