Auroville’s democratic heartbeat still strong

The 2024 Selection Process started on 18th March with a call for nominees. The Working Committee appointed by the Residents’ Assembly (RA-WCom) decided that our democratic lives should continue, despite it having emergency provisions to appoint members for the next six months. Three working groups were open to new nominees: the RA-WCom needed two members; the Auroville Council required six; and the Admission Committee (aka Entry Board) also had six openings. The Funds and Assets Management Committee (RA-FAMC) and the Town Development Council (RA-TDC) memberships were on hold as explained in the RA-WCom’s latest report to the community.

Participatory Working Groups process

Using the new process, based on the lengthily titled ‘Participatory Working Groups and The Selection Process of their members 2022’ (henceforth PWG), the Residents’ Assembly Service (RAS) had a type of bible to follow. This year was the third Selection Process since it was instituted two years ago. Whilst cumbersome and time consuming compared to a one-off vote, it ended up not just working, but enabling and strengthening some of the democratic fabric of Auroville.

Nominees

The nominees included those who self-nominated and those nominated by others, though they all needed to confirm their willingness to stand. Somewhat surprisingly, two of the Aurovillle Foundation Office’s (AVFO) approved Working Committee members were nominated for the RA-WCom, as well as a member of the AVFO approved Budget Coordination Committee standing for the Entry Board (though she later withdrew). The RAS emailed all nominees who had not confirmed their acceptance of standing. This sounds easy, but in a reality check of our bifurcated community, all emails coming from auroville.services or auroville.community to auroville.org.in email addresses are blocked. Instead, we sent emails from a private email address to all the nominees. For some we had to follow up with WhatsApp messaging and phone calls to confirm their willingness to stand, as well as, for a few, help them with their online application form.

In the end, we had a total of 24 people standing for the three Working Groups who confirmed their willingness to participate. To have ample candidates was a relief given the challenge of being in Working Groups at present, and we were happy to see there was and is still a desire to serve the community through its leadership groups.

Feedback

From 9th April, the community was given a two-week window to provide feedback on the nominees. In that time, 294 individual feedback entries were submitted. As provided in the PWG document, feedback was not made public, and the feedback givers could opt to remain anonymous (however their names were recorded by the RAS) or to disclose their name to the Selectors. The feedback was communicated anonymously to the nominees prior to the selection day, to give them the opportunity to respond or withdraw their nomination, and the feedback on the withdrawn nominees was deleted.

Feedback was and is a delicate issue, requiring as much confidentiality as possible. So rather than have online access, a system was set up where limited printed copies of feedback were shared among the Selectors at the time of selection. The feedback was then burnt to ensure that what was shared stayed private.

Selection

Using the Master List, the RAS created a pool of randomly chosen Selectors. To address past queries about this process, this is now done using a virtual randomising tool in the presence of three independent observers and also Silent Presence Keepers, and the whole process is filmed. To reach the maximum of 40 Selectors (with a minimal quorum of 24), more than 500 emails were sent out.

The email address issue continued to make life difficult, with about a third of potential Selectors using auroville.org.in email, so a personal email address was used to contact them. This was followed up with WhatsApp messages, and also with phone calls and even SMS. Phoning people brought home life’s realities. Responses I heard included: “I’m sorry but I’m in hospital”, and “Sorry but I am due to give birth in three days.” Other residents were leaving on summer trips, and some politely declined. Thankfully and in time, a sufficient number of Selectors were found (initially 37 people).

Training weekend

The training on 20th-21st April was mandatory for Selectors and took place on weekend mornings. On Saturday, there was a digestible presentation on the history of the Auroville Foundation Act; Working Group structures and mandates; and the Charter, Dream and ‘To be a true Aurovilian’. This was followed by a lengthy Q&A, with all questions answered thoroughly. On Sunday, the programme – facilitated by the Citizens Assembly group – focused on listening skills, recognising bias, consensus building and working with community feedback. This was both fun and experiential. As a whole, the training weekend provided high quality presentations with plenty of Q&A opportunities. The Working Groups also came and explained their requirements for new team members, such as full- or part-time hours, teamwork ethos and other specifics aimed at group equilibrium and optimal function.

The logistical arrangements were a bit fraught for the RAS, with numerous locations being too small for 60+ people, unavailable, or hesitant to be viewed as publicly supporting the RA. But two venues came forward at the last moment, which we used for the training and selection weekends. Both places hosted us with joy, generosity and good spirit. The RAS has been locked out of its office and had its budget absorbed in a separate AVFO-RAS, but the community came together and supported the RAS work with wonderful volunteers, technical help, tea and cookies.

The Selection Process

The Selection Process of the PWG is somewhat cumbersome. Firstly, the Selectors are randomly split into four groups. Then these four groups discuss and review the nominees and make a selection. In the first round, individuals are deemed ‘selected’ if they are chosen by all four groups. In the second round too, anyone chosen unanimously is deemed ‘selected’, while any candidates selected by two or three groups are put into a metaphorical hat (actually a Tupperware box) for lottery. Those with only one or no votes are not entered. Groups may also choose ‘null’ – the equivalent of ‘none of the above’, and this allows Selectors to indicate they don’t wish to fill every post or feel that the remaining candidates don’t fit the requirements of that Working Group. On Saturday morning, with the support of our excellent facilitator, we had a mock preparation with this process to give Selectors a feeling for what was involved. For each Working Group selection, the Selectors were randomly reassigned to new groupings.

Selection weekend

By the time of the 27th-28th April Selection weekend, the Selector pool came down to 29 people. We had decided to start with the Working Committee selection as a possibly easier introduction since there were only two openings and four nominees standing. After the Selectors had read the feedback, the nominees presented themselves and were asked questions for up to 15 minutes, including one candidate who joined virtually from abroad (as provided for in the PWG). For the first time – using the current three-year old procedure – the two vacant positions were filled in the first round itself, as all four groups chose the same two candidates. So, an early and tasty lunch was had.

The Auroville Council was to be chosen that afternoon. This was more complex, with eight people standing for six places. Again, feedback was read for half an hour, with printouts passed around among the Selectors; then the presentations and Q&A. The Selectors were very involved, with many questions to the nominees. It was heartening to see the active interest and involvement of young Aurovilians who had grown up here. This was one of many positive outcomes from the weekend.

The Selectors chose four Council members in the first round and no additional candidates in the second round. As with the morning, a somewhat quicker and more decisive experience than the past.

On Sunday morning, the Entry Board had eight candidates for six places (four nominees withdrew before the weekend). Four members were chosen in the first round. The second round resulted in two candidates and a ‘null’ option being put in the ‘hat’ for selection by lottery. In the end, one candidate and the ‘null’ option were chosen through lottery pick by an unaffiliated person. An employee of the location was requested to look away and put her hand in to choose the outcomes, and all was, as before, filmed for democratic proof should it be needed. This took a little longer than the day before, but still finished in time for a closing lunch.

Whilst our current selection method is lengthy and needs commitment from Selectors, I found that it worked, and worked well. The randomly chosen Selectors did their citizen’s duty as one would in a jury, and the nominees bravely faced the Selectors and answered questions. This allowed candidates to present themselves and seems to have given the Selectors a better feel for the candidates’ suitability beyond their written statements. In recent years, the Citizens Assembly team has helped us become aware (in Auroville and internationally) of the wisdom available in a group which is randomly selected and then given high level information, training and a mandate. This Selection Process exemplified that type of democracy in action with an Auroville community spirit.

There was an energising background of focus and harmony that helped us overcome challenges, including running this process at a time when people are afraid to stand out and also in the stifling heat of April end. This harmony manifested in the speed of choices on the first day, but also in a good humoured, vital and thorough approach to selection.

There was a large amount of Auroville goodwill and support on display throughout the process. A ‘magic team’ provided not just meals, but also fresh fruit, snacks and teas. The Silent Presence Keepers were a benign presence sitting just outside each selection group. We had volunteers offering help, and an excellent facilitator who continuously juggled schedules, explained the process in simple language, welcomed and thanked all the nominees, all with a light touch. Both locations offered help; on the last weekend, lunch was cooked and an endless supply of water and lemon water was made available to hydrate us.

Overheard at the end of the weekend were comments from Selectors including, “Having felt far from Auroville for 2 years, I now feel hugged by her”, “Didn’t realise it would be such a good process” and “The weekend was a jewel.” It was a window into the best of communal Auroville, coming together to serve the community in its next steps.