>But this is not what I want to talk about. I want to explore the possibility that EV and premies are speaking the truth when they say that Rawat is not in charge of Elan Vital, because it invites the question, 'If Rawat is not in charge, who is ?'.<
An excellent question; comparing how DLM/EV is run with commonly understood norms exposes just how devoid of common integrity Rawat's empire is.
My own view is that Rawat as 'sole trader' has never been an accurate reflection of how DLM/EV worked. I like Pat's comparison with the Mafia - Rawat the Don has depended on his loyal lieutenants to maintain the organisation. Those lieutenants are as culpable as Rawat for the corrupting influence of the Corporation of which they are the board of Management.
>OK, there are many organisations that are run by volunteers. But regardless of how the volunteers are chosen, I am not aware of any legitimate organisation that does not have some kind of member oversight over the decisions and finances of the organisation. To the best of my knowledge, with any of the Elan Vitals there is none.<
In most countries where there is a legal inheritance of English and/or Scottish Law, the tradition of philanthropic (I'm not sure that countries with Roman Law traditions are any better) organisation is primarily non membership, in that sense DLM/EV is not exceptional. In fact 300 years of English 'charity law' has been concerned with the abuses that arise from a system that depends upon a self selecting coterie of trusteeship.
Arguably the most effective philanthropic organisations are those with empowered memberships but this is often an area of consistent tension - organisations such as Green Peace, WWF and the English National Trust have all had long running internal debates about democracy and representation, not all of which have led to satisfactory conclusions.
Differences in legal structures make an overall judgement of the various national Elan Vital's rather difficult - in the specific circumstance of England and Wales, Elan Vital is controlled by its Trustees - it is not really appropriate to identify Trustees as being Volunteers - because the nature of trusteeship means that no one could be employed as a Trustee. Where there is no other provision for membership - the Trustees are the Charity's members. The Trustees in effect own the Charity, are legally responsible for every aspect of its operation and are the legal employers of staff (including staff who work on a volunteer basis.
The power to remove and appoint Trustees of Elan Vital UK is held by the Settlor - that is the entity that set up Elan Vital as a Trust in England and Wales. The Settlor is the Elan Vital Foundation registered in Switzerland - membership of the Elan Vital Foundation is secret. Elan Vital UK provides £500,000 in Charitable funds to EVF every year.
The Trustees of the English/Welsh Elan Vital at January 2005 were:
Roland Peter Klpzig
Susan Gower Robinson
James Shaw
Fredrick Grant
Most religious/philosophical organisations have a recognised membership - in Christian Churches the Congregation has at least a nominal membership status and in Non Conformist traditions very direct claims of ownership.
There were varying degrees of acknowledgement of membership in DLM although no legal entitlement was ever provided in the US or the UK - in Australia the EV constitution specifically defined membership - which was subject to appointment by "Maharaji" - I believe this same provision applied in France, New Zealand and elsewhere.
From 1972 to 1975/6 Rawat was registered as Chief Minister of the Divine Light Mission Church of Denver, Colorado (see Mishler et al). The same tax deal that saw several million dollars of DLM assets pass to Rawat's personal position, also removed Rawat from the legally answerable status of Chief Minister - thus he has successfully avoided the tax problems that saw Hubbard prosecuted and Scientology delisted as a non taxable operation while Hubbard remained alive.
In my view the answer to the question of who runs the corporate agglomerate that is comprised by the various Elan Vitals, TPRF, RVK etc. - is:
"there is an effective board of management that treats Rawat as the sole owner - Rawat sometimes acts as Chairman, sometimes as Chief Executive, sometimes as President - sometimes sitting back letting the board take care of his investments. The board of management has a rather fluid membership - its internal relationships are founded rather as that of Hitler's Gauleiters - hierarchical position is based upon current patronage of the Fuehrer and perceived success in the respective apportioned part of the empire. Whether there is any hope of this highly inappropriate operation ever being exposed to public view, is a question I'm rather pessimistic about - the only thing that will force it will be if premies demand representation and clear demonstration of where their money goes.
Nik
