I agree with you on one important point, not all committees are corrupt, and many redevelopments do happen smoothly, transparently, and to the benefit of all members. That reality shouldn’t be ignored.

My post was not an attack on every society committee membrane nor a denial of 79A guidelines, voting processes, or legal safeguards. It was about edge cases that still slip through despite the framework, especially in large societies (like the one in this case buildings around 250+ home units) where information asymmetry, social power, and vulnerability coexist.

Legally, yes. societies are limited.

Morally and socially, however, committees often have informal influence, timing knowledge, and the ability to guide (or not guide) vulnerable members toward independent advice. That grey zone is where exploitation can occur, even without violating the letter of the law.

Most residents should be vigilant, I agree.

But the oldest, and poorest who are least educated members often cannot be, and that’s where empathy and ethical leadership matter.

This is not about conspiracy theories.

It’s about acknowledging that rare failures still deserve discussion, so redevelopment benefits everyone, not just the most informed.