<img title="N Srinivasan" src="http://images.mid-day.com/images/2017/may/8Srinivasan.jpg" alt="N Srinivasan" width="670" height="446" /> N Srinivasan
For the first time in the last 15 years, a Special General Meeting (SGM) of the Board of Control for Cricket in India <a href="http://www.mid-day.com/articles/sc-bars-srinivasan-niranjan-shah-from-attending-bcci-sgm-on-july-26/18451165" target="_blank">(BCCI) will be without cricket administration&rsquo;s larger than life names like N Srinivasan, Niranjan Shah and Rajiv Shukla</a>.
This is a direct fall out of Supreme Court&rsquo;s special bench putting an end to disqualified state office bearers from attending the SGM. The three BCCI officials cannot attend even as nominees of the states. The court&rsquo;s orders would put in bind many state associations, which have been sending ineligible officials to all BCCI meetings.
Nominees like patrons and vice-patrons have wreaked havoc on the administrative structure of BCCI over the years. If a person cannot win or wants to remain at a distance from administration, yet wants to enjoy the fruits of administrative powers, he can be co-opted as a patron/vice-patron and can even be nominated to attend BCCI meetings. In December 2013, Delhi and District Cricket Association president Arun Jaitley withdrew from the elections since cricketers had thrown their hats in the ring. On the basis of proxies, his nominees won and within 15 days, DDCA&rsquo;s executive committee passed a resolution that Jaitley would be chief patron and would attend BCCI meetings as a representative of DDCA. In one shot, he could resume charge, yet no accountability could be fastened on to him since he was not an office bearer. Only a bright lawyer could think of such a plan. Interestingly, amicus curiae Gopal Subramanium and Committee of Administrators (CoA) counsel Parag Tripathi rightly stated that Srinivasan was ousted from BCCI because of conflict of interest and had been disqualified from becoming an office bearer. The SC judgment was categorical about him. He could not have become an office bearer of Tamil Nadu Cricket Association (TNCA), but he secured a back-door entry to the SGM by getting nominated. This is in clear violation of the spirit of the SC judgment.
With practically no fear of the law, BCCI office bearers have taken on the top court with the acting secretary of BCCI, Amitabh Choudhary, having invited the disqualified office bearers to the SGM. To a layman like me, this has been done in utter disregard of the apex court verdict, and is a clear case of contempt. In the fourth status report submitted by the court-appointed CoA, former cricket administrators Srinivasan and Shah have been described as &ldquo;disqualified office bearers with vested interest,&rdquo; who were trying to stall the implementation of Justice R M Lodha panel reforms. Any self respecting person would have been ashamed to read what is being written about them, but these two gentlemen are made of different mettle. Not only these two, but others like Choudhary, Rajesh Verma, secretary of Jharkhand State Cricket Association, Asirbad Behera, secretary of Orissa Cricket Association, and Baldev Singh Bhatia, president of Chhattisgarh State Cricket Association, have also seemingly committed &ldquo;gross contempt&rdquo; of the court&rsquo;s orders.
They have knowingly and intentionally breached the orders of this court by chairing and attending the SGM of the BCCI held on April 18 in New Delhi. Bright legal minds in BCCI also know how to manipulate the due process of law. Each time a tricky situation emerges, the administrators come up with the tested formula - &lsquo;take the issue to court&rsquo;. Stakeholders like cricketers, club owners and other detractors within and outside state associations will be embroiled in court for years, with a basic aim to eventually tire them out.
In Delhi, nearly 60 cases were instituted and defended by DDCA by employing dilatory legal tactics. Since cricket is an important facet of a state association, every attempt is made to assume control over cricketing matters. Taking over clubs including institutional clubs, is one way of increasing the management&rsquo;s control over cricket. It is another matter that DDCA spent Rs 2 crore on legal expenses and another Rs 2 crore on payments to various professionals every year. No one quite knows why a cricket body has to spend Rs 4 crore on professionals while much less is spent on conducting cricket. It is a similar story in practically every state association.
The one state-multiple-vote formula suits the entrenched office bearers to perpetuate their hold over BCCI and state units. First, it is considered below their standard to allow equal vote to starters like the North Eastern states and secondly their own hold over the BCCI apparatus will be weakened if those extra votes coupled with 3 Government votes are taken away.
Common folk are confused while trying to decipher what the Supreme Court means when they say &ndash; &ldquo;all concerned shall implement the recommendations of the Justice Lodha committee report as far as practicable, barring the issues which have been raised pertaining to membership, number of members of the selection committee, concept of associate membership, etc.&rdquo; What is simple interpretation for common, law-abiding citizens is diametrically opposite for BCCI office bearers. While common persons would first implement the judgment in letter and spirit, BCCI&rsquo;s legally aware mandarins would see this as an opportunity to find loopholes to delay its implementation.
Left to itself, BCCI is incapable of and uninterested in ensuring transparency.
With the way BCCI has manipulated and operationalised its constitution over the years, it is clear to everybody that it is incapable of, or even interested in achieving the values of transparency, objectivity and accountability, which can only be achieved by changing it. Everyone knows if the constitution of BCCI does not allow the values to be achieved then it could be said to be illegal as the cricket board is discharging public function.
After one year of the Supreme Court having given their judgment, BCCI office bearers still do not want to take steps to ensure that constitutional values are adhered to ensure institutional integrity, and are least bothered to implement the SC judgment which will help to ensure the credibility of the institution.
It is time that the Supreme Court ensures total implementation of their judgment, with no ifs or buts. And, it has to be done immediately. Judiciary is the only bulwark against the designs and manipulation of BCCI.
BCCI should not be allowed to ride roughshod. If necessary, a few days inside Tihar jail will help some recalcitrant office bearers to understand what the term, &lsquo;long arms of the law&rsquo; really means.

Left to itself, the Indian board is incapable of and uninterested in ensuring the transparency needed to run the game

Has the BCCI gone beyond law and control?

Virat Kohli enjoys at sea in Sri Lanka

Left to itself, the Indian board is incapable of and uninterested in ensuring the transparency needed to run the game

Has the BCCI gone beyond law and control?

Trending Stories

Latest Photos

Latest Videos

Latest Web Stories

Mid-Day Fast

Home / Sports / Cricket / Article / Has the BCCI gone beyond law and control?

Has the BCCI gone beyond law and control?

Trending Stories

Latest Photos

Latest Videos

Latest Web Stories

Mid-Day Fast