IPL 9: SC asks: Should politicians be only your advisors?
Persistent efforts by BCCI and its full members to block implementation of some crucial recommendations of the Justice RM Lodha committee yesterday provoked the Supreme Court to observe that public functions relating to cricket can be taken over by the government with the enactment of a law in Parliament
New Delhi: Persistent efforts by BCCI and its full members to block implementation of some crucial recommendations of the Justice RM Lodha committee yesterday provoked the Supreme Court to observe that public functions relating to cricket can be taken over by the government with the enactment of a law in Parliament.
“Why can’t the public function of BCCI be taken up by Parliament? The question is if the activity of organising cricket matches, sending and picking up national team, can be taken up by the Parliament. Suppose a law, by which Indian team can be selected by Indian Parliament,” a bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice FMI Kalifulla said.
he remarks by the bench came when Kapil Sibal, appearing for Baroda Cricket Association opposed the Lodha Commission recommendation of one-state, one-vote. Sibal said there is no restriction on the state to take over activities of the game but it will require change in bylaws and mentioned Article 19(4) of the Constitution.
The same issue was also raised by the bench when Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) was making its submission against the recommendation of one-state, one-vote policy. The senior advocate appearing for MCA also responded to the query on the recommendation prohibiting ministers and government officials in the cricket board. He said there should not be anything to demonstrate that a particular class is an outcaste.
MCA, headed by Sharad Pawar, favoured involvement of politicians in sporting bodies, saying presence of eminent people helps in getting work done for organising big sporting events which require police bandobast and other such things. “That is the reality,” he said, answering the bench’s specific query: “Can we only have politicians as advisors? Shouldn’t the system also function without any politician?”
Sibal also faced some sharp questions about lack of initiative by BCCI on the development of the game states like Manipur and Mizoram, as also about the discrimination in allocation of funds to cricket associations of states like Bihar. — PTI