NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court-appointed Justice Rajendra Mal Lodha committee posted a second set of FAQs on its website on Thursday to provide clarity on various issues.
Shorn of the verbiage, what this means is that all doors stand effectively shut for cricket administrators once they have completed nine years either at the level of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) or an affiliated state association or even both clubbed together.
And with a three-year "cooling off" if an administrator has completed or is close to completing three years (as is the case with Cricket Association of Bengal president Sourav Ganguly who would have to demit office in July), the wise men in the committee have introduced a system that disincentivizes not just the shady administrators but the good and well meaning ones as well.
As the Calcutta Telegraph's Lokendra Prata Sahi aptly points out: "It's unlikely that either Sourav or anybody else would be very keen on returning to administration after being consigned to the cold storage for three years. Only to again be exiled for three years after putting in that many years in the chair."
While the media has been debating the non-cooperation by the "disenfranchised" administrators of Indian cricket to the diktats coming from the Lodha Committee, it bears keeping in mind that if someone is left with ZERO skin in any game, that reaction is but natural, whether one is well intentioned or not.
This Supreme Court directed move, SportzPower believes, in the near term will result in complete administrative gridlock in Indian cricket administration at the very least. As for the long term, it is really a game of Russian Roulette now. IF the new set of administrators who will be elected in the coming months at the BCCI and its state units are competent and well intentioned, they will have three years in which to set the future course of Indian cricket on the right tragectory. If NOT, we could well have a situation where unscrupulous wheeler-dealers take over the administration of cricket, India’s most popular sport and the only one in which it is regarded as among the best in the world.
SportzPower sees no merit in luck by chance, but that could well be the best bet for Indian cricket going forward.
Lodha Committee Clarifications in full:
As per the first set of FAQs [6.9.2016], the Committee had stated that the 9 year disqualification for office-bearers applied separately to offices in the State and offices in the BCCI. Does this position continue after the Supreme Court's order dated 2.1.2017 and 3.1.2017?
This position has been now altered. In view of the order dated 2.1.2017 as amended by the order dated 3.1.2017, an individual is disqualified from being the office-bearer of the BCCI or the state/member association if he/she has been an office-bearer of the BCCI or the state/member association for 9 years. For example, one who has been the office-bearer of a state association for 9 years is disqualified from returning to cricket administration, either at the BCCI or at any state association. Similarly, one who has been an office-bearer at the state for 5 years and then at the BCCI for 4 years is also similarly disqualified.
Can disqualified office-bearers act as the representative/nominee of a member association or the BCCI? Can such an individual discharge any other role in or on behalf of the association or the BCCI?
In keeping with the spirit of the hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment, a disqualified office-bearer is no longer to be associated with cricket administration... He/she is disqualified from being a representative or nominee of the member association or the BCCI and cannot discharge any other role in or on behalf of the association or the BCCI... He/she cannot function within the association in any patron or advisory capacity, nor be a member of a committee or council.
Can elections be conducted for the member associations before the due amendments are made to their constitutions/bye-laws bringing them in line with the judgment?
While there is no bar to the holding of elections [subject to orders of any court], if any election is held which is inconsistent with the committee's report and the judgment of the Supreme Court, then the same will be treated as void and with no legal sanctity. This would also necessarily imply that such an election is supervised by an election officer as prescribed under the recommendations... It would be prudent in the circumstances for such elections to be conducted under the guidance of the administrators to be appointed by the hon'ble Supreme Court.
In a state/member association, if an individual has occupied the post of assistant secretary, assistant treasurer, director or any other post that is not defined as an 'office-bearer' in the Report, then will his tenure in those posts be calculated towards the 9 year disqualification?
If the constitution/bye-laws of the state/member association has defined the post [assistant secretary, assistant treasurer, director, etc.,] as an office-bearer post, then the tenure of an individual in any of those posts will be reckoned while determining whether the 9-year period has been completed. For example, in an association where the constitution refers to the assistant treasurer as an office-bearer, if a person has occupied that post for 3 years and also been secretary for 6 years, he stands disqualified.
Will a member of the governing body, managing committee or working committee of a State/Member Association who has never been an office-bearer also have the 9-year disqualification period apply to him?
Such an individual is eligible to contest an office-bearer post, unless the constitution or bye-laws of the association defines office-bearers to include the governing body/managing committee/working committee members.
If a state/member sssociation was earlier an associate/affiliate member of the BCCI, and was only recently recognized as a full member, will the tenure of the office-bearers for the 9 year period be calculated only from the time the association became a full member?
There is no connection between the type of membership of the association and the eligibility of the office-bearer. Regardless of whether the association was/is a full member or associate/affiliate member, the entire tenure of the office-bearer will be calculated towards the 9-year period... However, this will not apply to an association which has never been a member of the BCCI. In such an event, the tenure of the office-bearer will be calculated only from the date of the affiliation, unless he had already been the office-bearer of another affiliated association.
If an individual has been an existing office-bearer in a state/member association for 2 years, is he eligible to contest for the next elections without the 3 year cooling off period applying to him? If yes, what will be the term of his office?
If at the time of the election, the existing office-bearer has not completed a period of 3 years, he is eligible to contest the election. However, he will not have a full term and will have to demit office immediately upon the continuous 3-year period being completed. This is to avoid any potential abuse. For example, if there were no such bar, an office-bearer could resign after 2 years and 9 months, and then claim eligibility to stand at the next election 3 months later on the ground that a new term would commence.
- Log in to post comments