It’s crucial to understand that 11 Feb statement from APMP regarding the revocation of Baachu’s ATO status is the first instance where specific and detailed information for their June 2022 allegations was made publicly available. Prior to this, the only information we had received were a few copyright-related emails which we promptly responded to. However, until yesterday, we had yet to receive any evidence or specific details on the three allegations made by APMP.
The APMP recently made a statement regarding Baachu’s ATO status revocation, citing repeated copyright and IP infringement and competition with the APMP.Â
Read The Objective Assessment of Baachu APMP Dispute Here if you are not familiar with the issueÂ
IT IS IMPORTANT TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THEÂ DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE REASONS PROVIDED BY APMP IN JUNE 2022Â FOR REVOKING BAACHU’S ATO STATUSÂ AND THE ALLEGATIONS OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IN APMP STATEMENT RELEASED ON FEBRUARYÂ 12TH, 2023.
IN JUNE 2022, THE REVOCATION OF BAACHU’S ATO STATUS WAS PURPORTEDLY BASED ON BAACHU PROMOTING ITS OWN FEE-BASED PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY AS A CHEAPER ALTERNATIVE TO APMP’S OFFERINGS, AS WELL AS BAACHU SETTING UP ITS OWN FEE-BASED PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY.
HOWEVER, THE RECENT INTRODUCTION OF A COPYRIGHT CLAIM IN APMP’S 11 FEB STATEMENT SEEMS TO CONTRADICT THESE ORIGINAL REASONS FOR THE REVOCATION.  SUCH A CONTRADICTION RAISES SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE VALIDITY AND ACCURACY OF APMP’S ALLEGATIONS AGAINST BAACHU.
THE INTRODUCTION OF THESE COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN THE FEB 2023 STATEMENT, AFTER THEY HAD NOT BEEN RAISED IN PREVIOUS COMMUNICATIONS (JUNE 2022 LEGAL LETTER OR NOV 2022 APMP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HEARING) ALSO SUGGESTS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND GOOD FAITH ON THE PART OF APMP, THAT APMP MAY HAVE BEEN SEARCHING FOR ADDITIONAL REASONS TO SUPPORT THEIR DECISION TO REVOKE BAACHU ATOI, WHICH IS UNACCEPTABLE AND MAY CONSTITUTE AN UNFAIR AND DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE
THE QUESTION REMAINS – WHO WOULD STAND TO BENEFIT FROM BAACHU’S ABSENCE IN THE MARKET?
 READ OUR DETAILED ARTICLE HERE ON APMP DOUBLE STANDARDSÂ
FACTS FIRSTÂ
June 22 – The APMP Board voted to revoke Baachu’s ATO status for the
following reasons:
1. Baachu has sent out advertising, to APMP members and the proposal and bid management community, encouraging APMP members to consider Baachu’s certifications as “cheaper alternative” to APMP’s certifications. This is not only offering products that directly compete with APMP’s, but explicitly advertising them as alternatives to APMP, and denigrating APMP’s brand.
AS OF 16 FEB 2023, IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS NOT PROVIDED A SINGLEÂ EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIMÂ
2. Baachu has set up its own, fee-based proposal management community, outside of APMP, which, whether intentional or not, acts as a competitor/alternative to APMP;
THE CLAIM BY APMP THAT BAACHU’S FEE-BASED PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY IS A COMPETITOR OR ALTERNATIVE TO APMP IS SIMPLY NOT BASED ON FACT. BAACHU HAS ALWAYS BEEN TRANSPARENT AND OPEN ABOUT ITS BUSINESS MODEL, WHICH INCLUDES A PAID LEARNING ACADEMY WITH A COMMUNITY COMPONENT. THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT ONLY ACKNOWLEDGED BUT ALSO RECOGNIZED BY THE APMP BOARD WHEN BAACHU BECAME AN ATO IN 2018/19, AS DOCUMENTED IN APMP’S OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE.
3. IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS CLAIM THATÂ BAACHU MARKETED APMP MEMBERS TO JOIN BAACHU BID AND PROPOSAL COMMUNITY FOR A COST.
4.  IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CLAIM OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. IN FACT, NO QUESTIONS RELATED TO COPYRIGHT WERE RAISED DURING THE NOVEMBER 2022 APMP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HEARING NOR IN JUNE 2022 ORIGINAL LETTER OF REVOCATION.Â
5. APMP’S DECISION TO BRING UP ISSUES FROM MARCH 2019 AND JANUARY 2020 TO REVOKE BAACHU’S ATO STATUS IN 11 FEB 2023 IS QUESTIONABLE AND RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY.Â
Baachu and APMP Showdown: An Objective Assessment of Allegations and Facts
IT IS FAIR TO QUESTION WHY APMP HAS CHOSEN TO RAISE THIS COPYRIGHT ISSUE NOW?
Baachu denies the baseless allegations made by APMP in both June 2022 and February 2023, and we will not tolerate mistreatment from APMP. Despite the burden of proof being on APMP to provide verifiable evidence, we have addressed the allegations and provided our perspective. We urge APMP to provide clear and transparent evidence to support their claims so that we can work towards a constructive resolution.Â
Any claims must be based on legitimate grounds and verifiable evidence, and the burden of proof lies with APMP to substantiate their claims. Baachu is committed to addressing legitimate concerns, but we will not tolerate unfounded accusations or mistreatment from APMP.
COPYRIGHT AND IP INFRINGEMENT #1 and #2 Â and REPEATED COMPETITION WITH APMP #1:Â Â
CLAIM 1 : In March 2019, Baachu received its first copyright claim relating to the Proposal Specialist Guide. It’s essential for APMP members to understand the backstory of Baachu’s mission and objectives when joining the ATO Programme to put this claim into context.
BACKGROUND :
Baachu’s mission was to provide individuals in under-served geographies with equal opportunities for professional development. In 2018/19, the cost of APMP certification was $800, including membership, exam and training fees, which was often prohibitively expensive for many individuals in under-served geographies, such as India and other emerging economies.
In response, Baachu introduced the Proposal Specialist Certification in late 2018, with the aim of providing a more accessible learning opportunity for individuals who may not have had the resources to fully pursue the APMP certification. To clarify, the Proposal Specialist Certification was introduced for two main purposes. Firstly, to introduce the APMP Certification to emerging economies where it was not well known, and secondly, to provide a starting point for individuals to learn the basics of bid and proposal best practices.
The tagline “Not ready yet for APMP” was used to indicate that individuals could start with the Proposal Specialist certification and upgrade to the APMP certification when they are financially prepared. The objective was to eliminate cost as a barrier for individuals seeking a career in proposal management.
Baachu RESPONSE :Â
The study guide titled “Proposal Specialist: Pathway to APMP Foundation” was created to complement the Proposal Specialist Course and should not be considered as direct APMP certification material. Baachu made it clear in the guide that it was based on APMP copyrighted materials, and the connection to APMP copyrighted materials was prominently displayed on the cover. In March 2019, the guide was made available for sale on Amazon and was also added to Baachu’s own online store.
In March 2019, APMP raised concerns about copyright infringement regarding Baachu’s Proposal Specialist Guide. However, we at Baachu disagree that APMP had asked us numerous times about it. As soon as the concern was brought to our attention, we took immediate action and removed the guide from Amazon.
Conclusively, Baachu’s introduction of the Proposal Specialist Guide was done on good faith, with the objective of providing equal opportunities for professional development to individuals in under-served geographies. The concerns raised by APMP about copyright were dealt with immediately, and Baachu made it clear in the guide that it was based on APMP copyrighted materials. As a respected APMP Fellow pointed out, the issue was a result of naivety rather than malicious intent and was closed.
June 2022 CLAIM 1 Response :Â
Baachu strongly refutes APMP’s claim that it has sent out advertising to APMP members and the proposal and bid management community, encouraging them to consider Baachu’s certifications as a “cheaper alternative” to APMP’s certifications. Baachu conducted a survey in July 2022, and found that 99.92% of respondents agreed (which included APMP CEO and COO)Â that Baachu had not been actively promoting its certification as an alternative to the APMP certification.
Baachu has been committed to supporting and promoting APMP certifications in under-served geographies, particularly in India. Baachu introduced low-cost training options, such as APMP 500 and APMP 50, when APMP introduced $50 membership and $200 exam fees for India. These options were designed to make APMP certification more accessible to individuals who may not have had the resources to fully pursue the standard APMP certification.
Baachu’s achievements in enabling approximately 310 Foundation students and 18 Practitioner students to achieve APMP certifications speak to the success of its efforts to support and promote APMP certifications in under-served geographies. These numbers also contradict the claim made by APMP in June 2022 that Baachu was actively promoting its certifications as a cheaper alternative to APMP’s certifications.
The success of these efforts is reflected in the number of resources available for the two APMP certifications on Baachu’s LinkedIn page, Baachu Scribble, where there are over 550 posts and 55 videos related to APMP, and only three posts and one video related to the Proposal Specialist certification.
It is illogical and unfounded to suggest that Baachu actively promote its own certification as a cheaper alternative to APMP’s while simultaneously working to enable students to achieve APMP certifications. These facts demonstrate the inconsistency and falsehood of APMP’s claim against Baachu.
Baachu’s objective is to eliminate cost as a barrier for individuals seeking a career in proposal management, and the low-cost training options were designed to achieve that objective. The success of Baachu’s efforts in promoting APMP certification in India and other under-served geographies is evidence that the claim that Baachu is promoting its own certification as a cheaper alternative to APMP’s certification is false.
AS OF 16 FEB 2023, IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS NOT PROVIDED A SINGLEÂ EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CLAIMÂ
Second Copyright ClaimÂ
In January 2020, APMP became aware that Baachu had reposted the same publication online again and was selling it 10 months after Baachu was asked not to.Â
Baachu strongly rejects APMP’s second copyright claim, as it is not related to the issue raised in their first claim. The first claim concerned the use of a Proposal Specialist Guide, while the second claim relates to Baachu’s APMP Foundation Certification Study Guide, which was published online in January 2020 to support the needs of our students. Baachu categorically denies APMP’s second copyright claim, as the study guide was developed by our team and does not infringe on any existing intellectual property rights.
Background: The Baachu comprehensive APMP Foundation Study Course includes 200 Sample Questions, 31 Videos, 31 Slides, and over 300 pages of Study Guide. These resources were designed to help students gain a deep understanding of the APMP Foundation syllabus and effectively prepare for the certification exam. The Sample Questions provided students with practical examples of the types of questions they could expect to encounter on the exam. The Videos and Slides covered key concepts in a clear and engaging manner, making it easier for students to learn and retain the information. And the Study Guide provided a comprehensive overview of the syllabus and served as a valuable reference tool for self-study students.
In order to better cater to the diverse learning needs of our self-study students with 5+ years of experience, Baachu gathered them during the Christmas period of 2019 to assess the effectiveness of breaking down our comprehensive APMP Foundation Study Course into separate products, such as a study guide, audio lessons, and sample questions.Â
In Q1 2020, we introduced a range of learning options, including Free Resources, Audio Lectures, Study Guide Only, Self-Paced Online Training, Online Practice and Revision, Live Get Certified Workshops, and Face-to-Face Workshops, in addition to our comprehensive APMP Foundation Study Course
Response: Baachu strongly denies APMP’s claim that its Baachu Training Certification Study Guide for APMP Foundation is a copyright infringement. As an ATO, Baachu has the freedom and commitment to create study materials that meet the needs of its students. In fact, Baachu created the comprehensive study guide to serve as an additional resource for self-study students who have 5+ years of experience and want to familiarize themselves with the syllabus and practice questions to take the exam in a day. Additionally, Baachu shared its study guide with APMP before it was added as course material.
APMP’s partnership with ATOs to deliver training does not give it the right to dictate or prescribe what an ATO can or cannot do. Students have the freedom to use APMP’s study guide or any ATO study guide to pursue APMP certifications. It is worth noting that students and corporates have different APMP study options, but they still pay membership and exam fees to APMP. Baachu alone generated approximately $575,000 for APMP. Any ATO would agree that they are in the business of serving the bid and proposal profession, not for commercial purposes.
If APMP is concerned about copyright infringement, then it should consider self-delivering training instead of partnering with ATOs. APMP cannot expect to partner with ATOs to deliver training and then claim copyright infringement for materials created to serve the unique needs of their APMP members. Baachu strongly asserts that its comprehensive study guide is not a straight like-for-like APMP copyrighted material and was created based on the feedback it received from its students and their needs. Baachu stands by the fact that the study guide was not intended to infringe on any copyright or harm APMP in any way.
AS OF 16 FEB 2023, IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS NOT PROVIDED A SINGLEÂ EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CLAIMÂ
In conclusion, Baachu firmly rejects APMP’s second copyright claim regarding the Baachu APMP Foundation Training Certification Study Guide.
We call on APMP to provide verifiable evidence to support their allegation. As a responsible Accredited Training Organization (ATO), we take intellectual property rights very seriously, and all of our study materials are created in-house by our team of experts, without any copyright infringement. We demand that APMP provides us with clear evidence to support their claims, failing which we will explore all available avenues to defend our reputation and integrity.
We maintain the quality and integrity of our study materials, which are complementary to APMP’s materials, and we are dedicated to providing equal opportunities for professional development to individuals in under-served geographies.Â
As an ATO, we have a responsibility to create and provide resources for our students to achieve their goals, and the different modes of learning, including our study guide, attest to our commitment to the success of our 1600+ students and 100% pass rate.Â
Baachu believes that APMP has violated legal principles related to fair competition and non-discrimination by failing to provide evidence for their claims, disregarding due process, and treating Baachu differently compared to other ATOs.
Baachu contends that APMP has created unfair competition and demonstrated a discriminatory bias towards Baachu by failing to provide evidence for their claims, not following due process, and treating Baachu differently compared to other ATOs. Baachu asserts that APMP must adhere to the principles of transparency, accountability, and fairness, as it is essential to ensure that all ATOs and non-ATOs providing APMP training are treated equitably and that any claims are based on legitimate grounds.
APMP’S DECISION TO BRING UP ISSUES FROM MARCH 2019 AND JANUARY 2020 TO REVOKE BAACHU’S ATO STATUS IN 11 FEB 2023 IS QUESTIONABLE AND RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY.Â
THE LAPSE OF TIME BETWEEN THE ALLEGED INCIDENTS AND THE REVOCATION DECISION, SUGGEST THAT THE DECISION WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS.Â
THE INTRODUCTION OF THESE COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN THE FEB 2023 STATEMENT, AFTER THEY HAD NOT BEEN RAISED IN PREVIOUS COMMUNICATIONS (JUNE 2022 LEGAL LETTER OR NOV 2022 APMP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HEARING) ALSO SUGGESTS A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND GOOD FAITH ON THE PART OF APMP, THAT APMP MAY HAVE BEEN SEARCHING FOR ADDITIONAL REASONS TO SUPPORT THEIR DECISION, WHICH IS UNACCEPTABLE AND MAY CONSTITUTE AN UNFAIR AND DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE
THE QUESTION REMAINS – WHO WOULD STAND TO BENEFIT FROM BAACHU’S ABSENCE IN THE MARKET?
We have clearly outlined our reasoning and provided all the necessary details in our 22 Nov hearing which can be read here –Â Â https://baachuscribble.com/transcript-baskar-sundarams-detailed-7-minute-response-to-apmp-board-allegations-on-revoking-baachus-ato-status-at-professional-ethics-committee-hearing-on-21st-november-2022/
Point to note – I was misled and kept in the dark about the lack of impartiality in the Professional Ethics Committee (PEC) hearing. Despite receiving emails regarding the purpose of the PEC committee and APMP Board appeal to volunteers, it wasn’t until I joined the online meeting that I learned that there would be no independent jurors. This lack of transparency and impartiality is unacceptable and undermines the very purpose of the hearing
 MORE COMPETITION WITH APMP #2:
THE CLAIM BY APMP THAT BAACHU’S FEE-BASED PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY IS A COMPETITOR OR ALTERNATIVE TO APMP IS SIMPLY NOT A NEW INFORMATION. BAACHU HAS ALWAYS BEEN TRANSPARENT AND OPEN ABOUT ITS BUSINESS MODEL, WHICH INCLUDES A PAID LEARNING ACADEMY WITH A COMMUNITY COMPONENT. THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT ONLY ACKNOWLEDGED BUT ALSO RECOGNIZED BY THE APMP BOARD WHEN BAACHU BECAME AN ATO IN 2018/19 (AS DOCUMENTED IN APMP’S OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE)
Baachu strongly questions the veracity of APMP’s claims against them, particularly given the transparency of Baachu’s business model since the inception of its ATO operations. It is perplexing that APMP has only raised the claim that Baachu was competing after nearly four years, especially given that Baachu has consistently supported and promoted the APMP brand and professional development throughout this time.
Baachu firmly believes that the APMP has demonstrated unfair bias towards Baachu by subjecting it to a discriminatory and harsh standard compared to other ATOs that operate at the Chapter and International level. Many of these ATOs are part of APMP International and APMP Chapter, which raises questions of a conflict of interest. Baachu questions what steps APMP has taken to address this issue of potential conflict of interest?
Baachu recognizes that each ATO has its own unique approach and business model, offering diverse solutions to meet the needs of the proposal community. While some ATOs focus on providing hands-on consulting and training services, Baachu, through its paid membership model, provides a self-paced learning experience. However, the diversity in approach still allows individuals to choose the solution that best fits their needs and learning style. It is important to note that while Baachu’s business model may be unique, the approach of providing training and education on best practices in proposals is consistent across all ATOs.
Baachu strongly believes that singling out Baachu as a competitor simply because it has a learning subscription model is an unfair measure. The fact is that each ATO brings its own value and contribution to the industry, and it is important to recognize and appreciate the diversity in approach and offerings. It is unfair and unjust to single out Baachu as a competitor without taking into account the different approaches and valuable contributions that other ATOs, including Baachu, have made to the proposal management industry.
At Baachu, we have always been transparent about our business model and offerings. Our paid learning academy membership, which includes access to a range of resources such as execution plans, bite-sized courses, workshops, templates, a private community, and more, has been in place since May 1, 2019. It is important to note that our membership model does not include access to APMP certification courses, and our learning academy has never included any APMP copyrighted materials.
IT IS A FACT THAT APMP HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS CLAIM THATÂ BAACHU MARKETED APMP MEMBERS TO JOIN BAACHU BID AND PROPOSAL COMMUNITY FOR A COST.
In the field of bid and proposal management, many organizations, including Baachu, use widely accepted best practices and techniques, such as executive summaries, reviews, business development cycles, compliance matrices, and capture planning etc to create learning and process content. It is important to note that these best practices are not solely copyrighted material of APMP, and it would be inaccurate for APMP to claim otherwise.
Moreover, Baachu’s academy includes content on sales, marketing, project management, personal development areas which APMP does not provide any resources for. This showcases Baachu’s commitment to providing comprehensive and well-rounded training to its members, including areas beyond the traditional scope of APMP’s offerings.Baachu categorically rejects the baseless claims made by the APMP Board that our resources are based on their copyrighted materials.Â
We call on APMP to provide verifiable evidence to support their allegation. As a responsible Training Organization, we take intellectual property rights very seriously, and all of our study materials are created in-house by our team of experts, without any APMP copyright infringement.Â
Additionally, it is worth noting that individuals in the bid and proposal management field have the freedom to participate in multiple learning avenues and to choose the programs and resources that best suit their needs.Â
In conclusion,  We have always been transparent about our business and offerings.  Our paid learning academy membership model has been in place for over three years and has always been transparent and committed to providing high-quality training and education to individuals and organizations. We are proud of the hard work and dedication that we have put into building our business and will not tolerate any attempts to discredit it.
Baachu raises serious concerns about the credibility and accuracy of the allegations made by APMP, as the absence of verifiable evidence to support these claims questions their validity. Accusations without substantial evidence must be viewed with scrutiny and subject to critical evaluation, and the burden of proof lies with the accuser, i.e., APMP. Without verifiable evidence, any claims made remain unfounded and cannot be relied upon to draw conclusions.
Considering Baachu’s commitment to the growth and development of the proposal and bid management industry, along with the lack of verifiable evidence to support APMP’s allegations, it is important to question the merit of their claims. Approaching these allegations with objectivity requires relying solely on facts and verifiable evidence to make any judgments or claims.
BAACHU OPEN TO COLLABORATING WITH NEW APMP BOARD TO ADDRESS ISSUES
Baachu acknowledges the importance of open communication and transparency in resolving any disputes. However, we must note that the initiation of legal action against us by APMP with a letter sent on June 7th, 2022 has hindered our ability to communicate and engage in constructive dialogue.Â
We firmly believe that legal action should be a last resort, and we are committed to finding a mutually beneficial solution through open communication and transparency.
Baachu reiterates its willingness to work with the new APMP Board to address any concerns. We believe that all ATOs and non-ATOs providing APMP training should be treated fairly and equitably, and that any claims of copyright infringement should be based on legitimate grounds. We hope that the new Board will give us an opportunity to engage in constructive dialogue and find a solution that serves the interests of APMP members and the bid and proposal profession as a whole.
BAACHU URGES APMP MEMBERS TO RELY ON FACTS AND EVIDENCE IN JUDGING ALLEGATIONS.
Baachu’s commitment to the growth and advancement of the industry is evident through its unwavering investment in APMP’s development and its broader commitment to promoting the field. We implore the APMP members, our students, and the wider community to judge for themselves whether we marketed our certification and community as an alternative to APMP and infringed copyright as alleged by APMP.Â
It is essential to critically evaluate the allegations made against Baachu based on facts and evidence.Â
And for those of you who have witnessed our work first hand, you know the truth about our commitment to education and professional development. We hope that you will join us in our fight for fairness and justice.
JOIN US IN DEMANDING A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL HEARING TO CLEAR OUR NAME. ALL WE SEEK IS A CHANCE TO PRESENT THE TRUTH AND CLEAR OUR NAME FROM FALSE ALLEGATIONS. SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BY SIGNING THE PETITION TODAY:
As a valued member of APMP, your voice matters. We encourage you to sign the fair hearing petition as a way to hold the APMP Board accountable for their actions and encourage the new Board to open dialogue with Baachu. This petition is an opportunity for all APMP members to show support for open communication, fairness, and transparency in addressing disputes. By signing the petition, you can help ensure that all ATOs and non-ATOs providing APMP training are treated fairly and equitably.Â
We believe that by working together, we can create a stronger and more prosperous proposal management industry for all.
The petition link is
https://www.change.org/p/unite-for-justice-stand-with-baachu-and-demand-reinstatement-as-an-apmp-ato.
Signing the Change.org petition is anonymous and easy, ensuring that your privacy is protected while still making your voice heard in support of the cause.
Your support and encouragement will mean the world to me. Thank you for taking the time to read my story and for considering supporting our cause.
AS OF FEBRUARY 15, 2023, BAACHU HAS DEMANDED THAT APMPÂ PROVIDE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS.
WE WILL NOT REST UNTIL WE HAVE RECEIVED JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THIS DISCRIMINATION OR UNFAIR TREATMENT THAT HAS BEEN DIRECTED OUR WAY. WE WILL FIGHT TO DEFEND OUR REPUTATION , AND WILL NOT BE INTIMIDATED BY ANY ATTEMPTS TO DIMINISH OUR CONTRIBUTIONS OR SUCCESS.
WE BELIEVE IN THE PRINCIPLES OF TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND FAIRNESS, AND WILL NOT WAIVER IN OUR COMMITMENT TO ADVANCING THESE VALUES IN THE INDUSTRY. OUR RECORD OF PROMOTING GROWTH AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE INDUSTRY SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO ENSURE THAT ALL PLAYERS IN THE INDUSTRY ARE TREATED FAIRLY AND EQUITABLY.
Further details
Uncover the truth behind the situation and reasons behind our allegations of discrimination, unfairness, and lack of transparency by exploring the available evidence and our perspectives at
https://baachuscribble.com/scribble-blogs/apmp-discrimination/
Our mission to support underprivileged communities and the rationale behind proposal specialist guide and the learning community is detailed in my 7 min evidence on my PEC Hearing.Â
Transcript of my talk –Â Â https://baachuscribble.com/transcript-baskar-sundarams-detailed-7-minute-response-to-apmp-board-allegations-on-revoking-baachus-ato-status-at-professional-ethics-committee-hearing-on-21st-november-2022/
