International Voting Proposal
Surely not everyone believes the accusations flying around the internet! The accusations of undemocratic power grabbing on my part is false malignment. I have, along with other General Council members proposed reform measures to our international Rules in order to allow for more input from around the world, not less, as has been widely circulated.
Because there has been so much interest on the internet concerning this proposal that I sent to the international General Council of the TS on September 20, 2008, for discussion and consideration, I have posted those proposed resolutions on our website so that all can see the proposal in its entirety (not here due to space constraints). This proposal was the result of input from a number of other TS Sections. Although I think they are all advisable, considering the need to move into a more representative governance, I am also interested and open to other points of view.
First I think it important to address the issue that has concerned many members—democracy. Full representation is at the core of my proposal—yes, even relative to the election of international president by the General Council, rather than by popular vote. My concern stems from increasing trends in the Society toward a lack of transparency and openness to input. I do not lay blame on anyone’s doorstep because that is not what this is about. Over time, with a unitary head for almost 30 years, things drift toward inflexibility. This is one reason I so strongly support term limits for all offices.
In conjunction with this trend there has been a general tendency toward a less representative voting process. The elections are now essentially decided by one Section alone, India, due to its larger roles of membership. There are two difficulties with this: the rest of the Sections have no real representation, and the Indian Section has a different system of voting, with limited transparency due in part to its diverse linguistic makeup, and according to some former officers at Adyar, they do not have accurate records of their membership, nor do they maintain their ballot records for an adequate review period . . . This is hardly democratic. Although the proposed Rule change has been called undemocratic, there is nothing undemocratic about having a president elected by elected representatives.
My suggestion was one, but there may be other and better ways to reform the voting process. Possibly there could be another way to devise representation of all Sections. For the good of the Society as a whole, whatever we ultimately decide, the issue of fair voting practices must be addressed in a satisfactory manner.
Also, relative to the issue of quorum, under the present rules a quorum in the General Council is 5 out of 37. With 5 or more members being local to India, they can convene at a time when others could not travel and thus conduct business of their choosing without input from the other 32. A minimum 90 days’ notice of meeting has to be made to all members, and one can well imagine that this is not the kind of trip that can be made on such a relatively short notice. A more reasonable statement of quorum must also be formulated.
However, because of the almost impossibility of inserting anything new into the agenda for the international General Council, I had to send these ideas for reform in the structured format of complete, proposed resolutions in their entirety. Yet, even that was not enough to get any of the items onto the agenda in order to discuss and address the issues. I have been informed that they are not on the agenda but that it may be possible to bring the items up for discussion. Discussion without the opportunity to act is only forestalling a critical problem. We shall see. I have been told that the Secretary’s interpretation of Rule 49 requires a full majority of the General Council to have an item placed on the agenda—or a decision to do so may be made by the small Executive Committee of the current Adyar administration. Is this democracy at work?
The fact that the whole effort has been widely misrepresented and misconstrued is just another example of why we need reform. If you have additional ideas for further ways to develop our international body to better involve our diverse membership and thus vitalize our core principle of brotherhood, do let me know at Admin@theosophical.org.
Betty Bland
Click here to read the proposals