Upon their request, the English Press Club interviewed Shreeram Verma, the StuCCAn of the Department of Sponsorship and Marketing (Sponz). The conversation that took place was regarding the allegations made by them against the members of the Union Council (UC), following the events that took place in the Oasis Review Meet (ORM), which led to Sponz becoming a minor department.
Shreeram started by discussing the sponsorship amount they secured for this Oasis. He said that they had got Rs. 40 lakh of cash sponsorships and kind sponsorships worth Rs. 24 lakh. He mentioned that Sponz was also responsible for securing deals and handling logistics of the food stalls, which contributed to about Rs. 27 lakhs in profit. He explained that this was how Sponz brought in nearly Rs. 92 lakh this year.
He stated that following the deductions of Rs.1950, every General Body Member (GBM) was concerned about the efficient use of their money by the StuCCA, as the latter had promised. To ensure this, he said he was in constant touch with the Corroboration and Review Committee (CRC) to make a budget for the fest; so that at the very least it did not incur a loss, if not a profit. He explained that the money secured through cash sponsorships was used to compensate for the increased travel expenses due to the festive season. He also remarked that this money was also used to reduce the prices of Oasis snaps and souvenirs, to secure better production for Prof Shows, and to plan new events for this edition of the fest. Shreeram noted that none of the clubs and departments had an issue with their working, as they were constantly communicating with them regarding their needs.
He alleged that a few members of the UC had political motives and a personal agenda to turn Sponz into a minor department. To substantiate his claim, he said that he had seen multiple Instagram stories and WhatsApp messages by certain UC members, mentioning that they had misused their power to make them a minor department. He stated that they had raised a motion in the ORM to end their two-year probationary period and remain in the StuCCA. He explained that they required two-thirds of the UC to vote in favour of the motion for it to pass, but they only got six votes out of the total sixteen. He further claimed that this decision was not driven by the work Sponz did, but rather by the personal issues of some UC members. When asked why the UC members did not bring up these issues during the ORM, he conveyed that if the UC had discussed the department, they would have answered them. He added that ‘people’ in the meet, along with the rest of the StuCCA and the CRC, would have corroborated their answers.[1]
He went on to say that Sponz, the CRC and the StuCCAn, Finance were in charge of keeping a record of the money secured through sponsorships. He explained that if the UC secured the sponsorships, there would have been a chance that the sponsorship money would have transferred to other bank accounts through misuse of power.
The StuCCAn also mentioned that the inventory they had was never checked by the General Secretary or the member of the UC assigned to them for inventory checks. He also alleged that a few members of the UC had openly threatened to bring them down in APOGEE ‘25 too if they did not comply with their ‘wishes’.
He continued by saying that the Department of Art, Design, and Publicity (ADP) was put in a ‘similar’ situation this year at the ORM. He explained that they were threatened to be put on probation if they did not re-elect their CoStAAn and elect a StuCCAn favoured by the UC by that night itself. He said that this motion was blocked by the Election Commission when ADP provided a voice recording of a UC member admitting that they were threatening the department as proof.
Regarding their plans for APOGEE ‘25, he said that they would try their best to secure the highest amount of sponsorships possible. He also said that he feared that the UC would make unnecessary allegations against them by abusing their powers. As for the following editions of Oasis, he said that it would be difficult for Sponz to bring in the same amount of sponsorships as they were not a major department any more. He further explained that being a part of the StuCCA gave them the power to ask other clubs and departments to modify their events according to the requirements stated by the sponsor. He highlighted that this process helped them build strong relationships with sponsors and maximise the money brought in — but it would not be the case moving forward.
On a parting note, he said that he wanted a comprehensive review of the Oasis charter, to keep a check on the powers of the UC pertaining to clubs and departments. He urged the GBM to question the concerned UC members and get a thorough explanation of why the decision to make Sponz a minor department was taken.
[1] The EPC would like to bring to light that Sponz also had to acquire a simple majority of votes from the Oasis Review Committee (ORC) according to the Oasis Charter for the motion to pass. It was later confirmed that the ORC also failed to pass the motion, contributing equally to Sponz becoming a minor department.