dailyO
Sports

Cricket no longer a game, thanks to Srinivasan and BCCI

Advertisement
Rajeev Dhavan
Rajeev DhavanJan 26, 2015 | 16:29

Cricket no longer a game, thanks to Srinivasan and BCCI

In 2013-14, the BCCI's (Board of Cricket Control of India) was worth Rs 4,088.94 crore. Its surplus from IPL were Rs 334.86 crore, from tours Rs 137.45 crore, from CLT and share of IPL Rs 91.53 crore, from media rights Rs 108.02 crore. From the domestic Twenty-20, the gross receipts were Rs 1,194 crores resulting in the surplus. Of course, BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary thought it was due to good bank interest; others that it was due to cost cuts. BCCI remains the richest cricketing organisation in the world.

Advertisement

What a story! Were the bosses of BCCI doing something funky? By mid 2013, the police slapped the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) on 26 accused including pacer Sreesanth? Questions were asked how Rhiti corporate gave a minimum guarantee for promotions of Rs 210 crores to India's captain Dhoni? The sports management and talent management industry grew to Rs 3,000 crores. Was there a "best friends club" to fix cricket matches? The Rajasthan Royals' sponsors Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty were being watched by the police. In June 2013, a Chennai club (Bharathi) moved against Srinivasan of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association for 20 irregularities including over the cost of Chidambaram Stadium? Meiyappan, allegedly involved in fixing, was released from jail on June 5, 2013 with strict reporting conditions.

Blind enthusiasm

Srinivasan's India Cements was filled with cricketers and others working there. Indian cricket was in the hands of large corporates, fixers, hi-fi peddlers and criminals. Everything was up for grabs. The Indian populace loved the game and put themselves in a "do-not-disturb" mode when watching or listening. A Supreme Court bench adjourned for the day when India beat Australia in Kolkata.

Advertisement

As long as the game was played and India and their teams won, the receptive Indian populace didn't care. Most Indians do not have heightened sensitivity to corruption which is seen as a success story. But as Indian cricket got murkier who would tackle the corruption? The breakthrough came in Justice Thakur's judgment of January 22, 2015 in the BCCI case. Argued on the back foot by the alleged transgressors, the case was replete with some useless controversies which occupy a large part of judgment. The first of these was whether the Mumbai High Court had jurisdiction over the BCCI. It was clear the BCCI was not part of the Indian "state" and no violation of peoples' fundamental rights issues could be thrown at it. On this a seven-judge bench laid down authoritative tests in the Biswas ruling (2002). But BCCI was clearly a public body amenable to the court's jurisdiction after the Andi Mukta ruling (1989). Why Justice Thakur addressed this question with such rigour is not clear? Perhaps, rich lawyers paid by the day were pushing empty controversies in the vain hope they might succeed.

The first real issues were the charges and punishment against Gurunath Meiyappan, Raj Kundra, Sundar Ram. Were there links to Srinivasan? This was to be examined by a team of judges consisting of former Chief Justice Lodha, and former Justices Bhan and Raveendran. Lodha was one of the most perceptive judges of the Supreme Court of India. No nonsense will get past him. The second issue was the reform of the BCCI rules which will also be examined by the committee.

Advertisement

Important rules

One very important rule is Clause 15 of the BCCI Memorandum of Association which had been altered to suit Srinivasan and others. The president-ship of the BCCI rotates region-wise so that the president will come from that region. Now it is the turn of the Eastern Region. The changed rule would enable Shrinivas of South Zone to win the presidency by lobbying and other "persuasions". This should have been struck down. Perhaps, the Lodha Committee will take care of this.

The major breakthrough in this case was over "conflict of interest". Regulation 6.2.4 was especially changed for Srinivasan and others like him. Before the rule ensured that "No administrators shall have directly or indirectly any commercial interest in the (Boards) matches and events". On September 27, 2008, the rule was changed to "exclude events like IPL and Champion League Twenty 20" from Regulation 6.2.4's primary dispensation. This meant that Srinivasan could now become president despite the conflict of interest between his commercial interest in these tournaments through his corporate concern, India Cement's, stake in Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and the BCCI's oversight which required the president and committee to take tough decisions in respect of IPL-sponsored teams. Newspapers and others thought I turned the case on conflict of interest.

Forced to choose

It does not matter that the argument is mentioned but not my name. The court struck down the amendment. Srinivasan would have to choose between Indian Cements-driven CSK and the presidency of BCCI.

Conflict of interest plagues Indian governance. Doctors are linked to pharma and equipment corporates, administrative officers with covert deals and contractors, judges with investment and so on. The point is that such conflicts of interest are bad not just because they lead to corruption or maladministration, but inherently bad and inimical to governance. It should not be necessary to show actual bias or consequential corruption. Such situations of conflict should be impermissible.

In 2011, there was a private member's Conflict of Interest Bill. No one was interested. We need conflict of interest legislation now. This should be the top item on Modi's agenda: Legislate against conflict of interest. Clean public and commercial life.

Last updated: January 26, 2015 | 16:29
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy