7 March 2000
 
 
 
 
 
 

Dear

Thank you for your letter of 6th March.

Anyone reviewing our correspondence will be able to see that you sought to constrain my human rights by referring to an alleged legal opinion. I have continued to ask for a copy and you have failed to provide it.

You claim that ACCA council prohibited any mention of web site addresses in election statements. No such policy was communicated to any potential candidate either through the official magazine, or any information pack that you sent. I asked for a copy of the alleged council minute and you have failed to provide it. Subsequently, you cited an extract from a council meeting that you referred to as the “last meeting”. However, the meeting took place on 17th February, nearly two weeks after the deadline for submitting election papers. This meeting was attended by individuals who are standing for the council elections. There is a clear conflict of interests, especially as the decision was made after seeing my election statement. I asked questions about the ‘conflict of interests’ and you have given absolutely no response.

My inquiries have shown that no other election candidate has been told that s/he cannot mention web site address in his/her election statement. Despite requests, you have failed to provide any evidence to the contrary. It seems that the rules are being devised and applied only to me. As the same policy statements have not been communicated to all the candidates, the inescapable conclusion is that ACCA officials are pursuing racist policies.

I drew your attention to the way previous election statements have invited ACCA members to refer to information that is not contained in the 180 words election statement. You ignored the evidence and the issues. I drew your attention to the fact that the provision of information is a legitimate part of democratic debates and elections. Indeed, ACCA claims that it needs to have ‘delegated proxy voting system’ because members do not have an opportunity to become familiar with the policies of a candidate. My election statement has a potential to address the issues and give ACCA members information. But then you claim that this cannot be done. Web sites are used in Mayoral, local, regional, general, trade union and elections of professional bodies to disseminate information. ACCA’s own web site supports the status-quo and thus supports the council candidates seeking (re)election. For some reason, this is considered to be acceptable. Again, you provided no response

ACCA officials are violating my human rights and are pursuing policies that appear to be racist. You have no moral or legal authority to unilaterally change my election statement. I have not given you any authority to change my election statement. The responsibility for the consequences shall rest entirely with you.

I am sure you will agree that the public ought to see the manner in which a ‘public body’ (ACCA is a regulator) thwarts democratic exchange of information, engages in censorship, manufactures the rules of elections and devises policies which are totally unfair and are not supported by evidence. Therefore, the entire correspondence will now be placed on the internet.
 
 

Yours sincerely
 
 
 
 

Prem Sikka