Theos-Talk Archives (May 2008 Message tt00740)

Dear Govert,

Maybe my presentation is not clear enough and I should put headings 
in front of sections which follow the nomination and election process 
as stated in the Rules and Regulations.

The Sections I, II, and III refers to the nominations period and in 
that period there are no restrictions regarding the circulation of 
any material present in the Rules and Regulations.

But it is not so after the voting material is sent out (Sections IV, 
V, VI). In that period there is a specific restriction present in the 
Rules and Regulations: "Other material concerning the candidates 
shall not be circulated." So, any circulation of any material in that 
period is infringement of the Rules and Regulations and therefore 
your analysis is very valuable and your conclusions, in my view, 
correct. 

Now, regarding some of your other observations, I don't want to enter 
too much into details for this would necessarily mean to express too 
personal views about some ethical behavior of co-members. 

But regarding the Elvira Carbonell's email letter I think that it 
didn't violate any Rule. While regarding the status of the 
President's letter, I think that this is not relevant; any 
distribution of any material concerning the elections is prohibited. 
There should be what we call here "elections silence"; no member 
should try to influence any other member of the TS. Besides that in 
his Timeline Pedro Oliveira wrote: "12 March 2008 - Radha Burnier 
writes a letter, by ordinary mail, in her personal letterhead, to all 
General Secretaries of the TS, ?", so it wasn't "private" letter.

Thanks and warmest regards,
Anton 



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@...> 
wrote:
>
> "II/3 Comment: There are no restrictions present in the Rules and
> Regulations
> regarding the material sent by whomsoever regarding the 
nominations."
> 
> Dear Anton,
> 
> Thank you for pointing this out, and for doing the rest of your 
analysis.
> This is very important to contemplate in this situation, because, 
if any and
> all letters are legitimate according to this interpretation, then we
> actually have no problem! Case closed and I'll have to revise my 
analysis of
> the letters.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/44374
> 
> But, ... even though the Rules and Regulations do not restrict the
> dissemination of 'electioneering' and other material (and for the 
sake of
> freedom of expression and tranparency of procedures I do agree with 
that),
> the problem lies with the use of official mailing-lists and the poor
> contextualization and ligitimazation of the letters send (Except 
for one,
> i.e. Betty Bland's letter to the GC. See my analysis). And it's 
here that I
> think the crux of the matter lies. My observations then would be 
(still) the
> following:
> 
> 1) Did Elvira Carbonell use her position as assistant-secretary to 
the TS
> secretary to get access to the mailing-list of GC members in order 
to,
> possibly illigimately, send all of them her ligitimate concerns? Or 
did she
> only send to those she personally knew and was friends with and 
therefore
> was exercising her non-restricted right to freely express herself 
to her
> peers? Or, there is no problem, because the e-mail and snail-mail 
addresses
> of the GC are public property anyway as they are posted on the TS 
Adyar web
> site at http://www.ts-adyar.org/directory.html ?
> 
> The question is very relevant also in the light of the fact that 
she was
> asked to leave. What was the reason for that? If she was told to 
leave
> because of the content of her letter, then others, having made 
similar
> infringements, should be in trouble too. Or, if she was asked to 
leave for
> illigitimate use of her access to an official mailing list, then 
again,
> others, having made similar infringements, should be in trouble 
too. Or, we
> follow your (Anton) lead and perceive all these letters as non-
restricted
> communications, regardless of how e-mail and snail-mail addresses 
were
> obtained, and declare the case closed. Or, there was no problem at 
all, as I
> indicated above, because she used a publicly accessible mailing-
list and
> therefore be offered an official apology and gesture of 
compensation.
> 
> 2) What is the status PTS Burnier letter? Still, nothing definitive 
can be
> said about that. My hypothesis is still that the letter "started 
out as a
> private letter, but through wide dissemination it became a de facto
> electioneering letter, which then, implausibly, was construed as a 
response
> to Carbonell to defend its legitimacy." As she herself has not 
addressed
> this, nor anybody else for that matter, it is still open how to 
perceive her
> letter.
> 
> (BTW, those who call upon the other actors in this case to come 
forth and
> explain and/or correct certain statements, should also be concerned 
about
> the unclear status of the PTS letter, and call equally upon her to 
do so. My
> position is here that all communications were voluntary and that 
only if any
> of the writers think they made an egregious mistake, then they 
should
> voluntarily come forward to confess. Otherwise, when others think 
egregious
> mistakes were made, our system of checks and balances can kick in 
with
> filing complaints and requesting an inquiry.)
> 
> 3) Did Betty Bland have sufficient reason to use the official TSA
> mailing-list to disseminate her private letter? As stated before, 
her letter
> to the GC was in my opinion entirely legitimate, because it was a 
response
> to what she perceived as electioneering and she used a mailing-list 
open to
> the public. Her letter to the TSA membership is problematic, 
because of the
> mailing-list issue, and because she provided a poor legitimization 
and
> contextualization for breaking both tradition and rules. Still, she 
might
> have broken open an important issue that probably should have been 
earlier
> and better addressed by the PTS herself and/or the Election 
Committee.
> 
> Thanks again, Anton, for your contribution. I move to have it 
listed high up
> in the Slovenia TS web site on the 2008 elections.
> 
> Yours Sincerely
> 
> Govert
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Anton Rozman" <anton_rozman@...>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 7:53 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Independent Inquiry into the TS Election
> 
> 
> Dear friends,
> 
> It seems that once again an attempt to make an impartial observation
> is needed in regard to the authority and due acting of certain 
bodies
> of the TS regarding the election process. As there are not all data
> available some presumptions will be included.
> 
> I/1 Rules and Regulations:
> 
> (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.
> 
> I/2 Execution:
> 
> In December (data not available) 2007 the Executive Committee
> appointed the Election Committee.
> 
> ....
> 
> II/1 Rules and Regulations:
> 
> (b) Immediately on its appointment; the Election Committee shall
> instruct the Secretary to send out to the members of the General
> Council a written call for nominations for the office of President.
> The call for nominations shall be sent by airmail or other
> expeditious means if airmail be unavailable, followed one week later
> by a second (duplicate) call.
> 
> II/2 Execution:
> 
> 18 December 2007 the call for nominations was sent by airmail by
> International Secretary.
> 
> 19 December 2007 an email letter was sent to members of the General
> Council by assistant to the International Secretary regarding the
> nominations.
> 
> II/3 Comment:
> 
> There are no restrictions present in the Rules and Regulations
> regarding the material sent by whomsoever regarding the nominations.
> 
> ....
> 
> III/1 Rules and Regulations:
> 
> (d) At the expiration of ten weeks, the Election Committee shall
> place all the nominations received, together with the relevant
> papers, before the Executive Committee at a meeting especially
> convened for the purpose. At such meeting the Executive Committee
> shall examine the nominations.
> 
> III/2 Execution:
> 
> Presumably in March (data not available) the Election Committee
> placed the nominations received, together with the relevant papers,
> before the Executive Committee.
> 
> III/3 Comment:
> 
> Presumably the Election Committee and the Executive Committee didn't
> find any point of the nomination process disputable.
> 
> ....
> 
> IV/1 Rules and Regulations:
> 
> (e) The Secretary shall then immediately communicate in writing by
> airmail or other expeditious means (followed one week later by a
> second and duplicate communication) the voting list together with
> biographical data of the candidates in accordance with Appendix A to
> these Rules, to the General Secretaries, Regional Secretaries,
> Organizing Secretaries, and Presidential Representatives and to the
> Lodges (Branches) and Fellows-at-large attached to Headquarters.
> 
> Other material concerning the candidates shall not be 
circulated. ...
> Other information may be included but must be factual and shall not
> contain statements of opinion or policy. The biographical data for
> circulation shall be drawn up by the Election Committee on the basis
> of the information supplied by the candidates, and shall be approved
> by the Executive Committee (excluding any candidates for election)
> before being issued.
> 
> IV/2 Execution:
> 
> Presumably in March (data not available) the Executive Committee
> communicated in writing by airmail the voting list together with
> biographical data of the candidates to the General Secretaries,
> Regional Secretaries, Organizing Secretaries, and Presidential
> Representatives and to the Lodges (Branches) and Fellows-at-large
> attached to Headquarters.
> 
> 12 March 2008 the President (one of the candidates) wrote a letter 
to
> all General Secretaries of the TS regarding the elections. The 
letter
> is delivered to the members at least in some countries.
> 
> 19 March 2008 the National President of the TS in America sent an
> email message to all General Secretaries regarding the elections.
> 
> 29 March 2008 the French TS Board issued a circular letter to all TS
> members in France regarding the elections.
> 
> 11 April 2008 the National President of the TS in America issued a
> personal letter to all American TS members regarding the elections.
> 
> Other correspondence between officials and members regarding the
> elections were taking place.
> 
> IV/3 Comment:
> 
> Presumably the Election Committee didn't report to the Executive
> Committee that violations of the Rules and Regulations regarding the
> elections were going on. Presumably members of the Executive
> Committee themselves didn't react to the violations and didn't find
> necessary to call a special meeting regarding the elections.
> Presumably the President didn't react in regard to the violations of
> the Rules and Regulations concerning the elections and functioning 
of
> the Election Committee and the Executive Committee.
> 
> .....
> 
> V/1 Rules and Regulations:
> 
> Other material concerning the candidates shall not be 
circulated. ...
> Other information may be included but must be factual and shall not
> contain statements of opinion or policy. The biographical data for
> circulation shall be drawn up by the Election Committee on the basis
> of the information supplied by the candidates, and shall be approved
> by the Executive Committee (excluding any candidates for election)
> before being issued.
> 
> V/2 Execution:
> 
> 19 April 2008 the Election Committee at Adyar issues a letter to the
> General Secretary of the Theosophical Society in France regarding 
the
> elections (in favor of one candidate).
> 
> V/3 Comment:
> 
> Presumably the Election Committee didn't seek that the letter should
> be approved by the Executive Committee, so it itself violated the
> Rules and Regulations.
> 
> .......
> 
> Summary:
> 
> Obviously the violations of the Rules and Regulations in regard to
> the elections took place and the fact that it seems that none of the
> responsible bodies of the TS (members of the General Council, the
> President, the Election Committee and the Executive Committee) 
didn't
> react officially to settle the problems shows that there is present
> serious dysfunction of the TS administration. So, it seems that 
there
> is an urgent activation of all unifying forces and the TS' bodies
> needed, not to investigate quite clear situation, but to bring the
> functioning of the TS within the constitutional frame and to propose
> the best solutions for the near future. In my view, a pragmatic
> solution in the best interest of the TS would be to indeed nominate
> for that purpose an extended and provisory council formed out of
> respected and capable members as Sections' representatives. And then
> encourage, help and support young members, unconditioned by the past
> wounds, to create the Theosophical Society they want and deserve in
> the future.
> 
> Best regards,
> Anton
> 
> 
> p.s. If an independent inquiry should be anyway conducted into the
> election process as a whole then the standards which are usual for
> the democratic inquiries may be of help:
> 
> 1. Inquiry is taken up on the basis of the description of matter of
> public significance which has to be the subject of inquiry, the
> statement of purpose of inquiry and the expected extend of inquiry.
> 2. For the execution of inquiry a special Commission is formed.
> 3. A Commission has to determine the procedure. The rules of
> procedure have to safeguard the right of the parties to a fair
> procedure. Its work is based on the principles of impartiality,
> independence and competency.
> 4. A Commission does not confine its work to an examination of
> information furnished by parties themselves or in support of their
> contentions but takes all necessary measures to obtain as complete
> and objective information as possible on the matters at issue.
> 5. It is essential for the execution of inquiry that interested
> public has as much information about the proceedings to assure the
> transparency of inquiry.
> 6. A Commission draws exact records of inquiry (including the full
> registration of public hearings) and finishes it with the report and
> suggested measures.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>