The National Advisory Board (NAB) of IAPP’s

The National Advisory Board (NAB) is the supreme authority as per the IAPP’s registered constitution (2002). It can overrule decisions made by the Executive Committee (EC) and the General Body Meeting (GBM). It also holds the power to amend any rules at any time.
The NAB was initially constituted by the 15 founder signatories of the Memorandum of Association. Among them, the founder President, Dr. A.K. Kala, resigned from IAPP due to differences in work ethics. Dr. N.K. Bohra, Dr. K.G. Thanvi, Dr. Razdan, Dr. Jhanwar, and Dr. Shabany have passed away.
As per the constitution, founder members are permanent members. Only they have the authority to co-opt new permanent members when vacancies arise.
Earlier, the NAB had 24 permanent and 6 temporary members (with a tenure of two years). After the 2013 amendments, it now consists of 20 permanent and 10 temporary members, all nominated by the NAB.
The NAB nominates 5 EC members, while the remaining 7 members are supposed to be elected. These 12 EC members then elect the President, Secretary, and Treasurer.
However, since 2008, no proper election has taken place for the 7 elected EC positions.
No election notifications are issued, which is why a comprehensive and updated directory of all members with accurate names and email IDs is not available.
The NAB invites selected individuals to file nominations, and without any actual election, they are declared “selected” or “elected.”
The EC acts as the executive arm of the NAB, organizing events and forming committees — but only with NAB approval.
The NAB delegated full event management and financial control to a committee named Medisquire. There is widespread speculation (though I lack direct proof) that some NAB members may be financial stakeholders in Medisquire. It’s an open secret — like the proverbial “elephant in the room” — but no one dares to name it openly.
NAB members often operate behind the scenes. The most recently nominated NAB member was Dr. Avinash Desouza. While he is a capable person, his nomination bypassed many more deserving individuals based on standard criteria. After serving four years as Secretary, he was again nominated to the EC and later to the NAB. He is also being discussed as a future Treasurer.
In practice, 3 or 4 key individuals control most of the decision-making and power.
I attempted to engage constructively with the NAB after the 22nd February 2025 meeting and wrote several letters — which I will share separately.
Following my letter, the 20-member NAB committee convened in Delhi to discuss my stance and proposed to initiate a dialogue.
Dr. Sunil Mittal, Dr. Avinash Desouza, and Dr. Gautam Saha visited me at my clinic in Ahmedabad on 29th March.
We had a detailed discussion. I reiterated that subcommittees should not be dissolved, the President must not be a puppet, the Constitution must be amended, the General Body should be supreme, leadership positions should be decided through elections (not nominations), and all IAPP records currently held by Dr. Rajesh Nagpal must be handed over to the committee in power.
Subsequently, two boxes of documents were couriered to me.
Around the same time, we were working tirelessly on the Mid-Term CME in Bhopal (26th & 27th April), which turned out to be a grand success. We also felicitated three legends of IAPP: Late Dr. M.A.M. Khan, Dr. N.K. Bohra, and Dr. M.R. Jhawar.
While reviewing the records, my team identified multiple non-compliances and irregularities.
I wrote a confidential letter suggesting regularization of these issues. The leadership agreed and scheduled a meeting with Dr. Gautam Saha, Dr. Sunil Mittal, Dr. Rajesh Nagpal, Dr. Venu Jhanwar, and Dr. Avinash Desouza at 3 PM on 24th April 2025 in Bhopal.
Unfortunately, due to a flight delay, some participants couldn’t arrive on time.
On 25th April at 5:30 PM, I was called to Dr. Avinash’s room where Dr. Nagpal and Dr. Jhanwar kindly requested me to “forgive and forget” and to continue working for the betterment of the Association — I agreed.
Subsequently, we held an EC meeting and approved all pending points.
However, in the NAB meeting, the same contentious issues were raised again: a single PAN card for all, no state autonomy, and implementation of all previously rejected constitutional amendments. They also refused to acknowledge General Body supremacy or the need for constitutional reform.
I objected. I proposed that such centralization of power and structural changes should first be discussed in the State and National Collaboration Committee. If state representatives agree, I would accept the consensus.
The Collaboration Committee was scheduled for 5th May, attended by Dr. Nagpal — the rest is already known.
I maintain my work ethics and have no personal agenda.
My son and daughter-in-law, both capable psychiatrists and skilled organizers, have never been promoted by me. They are only invited as faculty by others.
I am aware that being this bold may come with personal and professional costs.
However, I believe in leaving a lasting impact wherever I serve.
There must be a difference between the world before I came and after I leave.
Warm regards,
Mrugesh Vaishnav