SC may take final call on Lodha reforms

ON MONDAY, the Supreme Court is likely to give its ruling on the Lodha Committee’s third statusreport,submittedonnovember14,asking for the disqualification of office-bearers of thebcciandallstateassociations,whobecame ineligible as per the apex court’s July 18, 2016 order. Also on the cards is the appointment of former Union home secretary GK Pillai as “observer”,especiallytomonitorallbccicontracts.

Abenchheadedbychiefjusticeofindiats Thakur might also pronounce upon as to whether a panel of administrators should replace the BCCI office-bearers to allow the absolute implementation of the Lodha reforms.

Duringthedecember15hearing,thecourt had asked the BCCI to propose names who could replace the existing office-bearers and preside over the game in the country. The board,however,hadruledoutthepossibilityof submitting any names. Accordingly, no suggestion has been forwarded and it’s now for the court to take a call on this matter.

The BCCI had also opposed Pillai’s appointment even as amicus curiae and senior lawyer Gopal Subramanium supported the Lodha Committee and pressed for the appointment of Pillai, EX-CAG Vinod Rai and former India batsman Mohinder Amarnath to supervise the functioning of the cricket board. BCCI counsel Kapil Sibal objected to all the names, especially Pillai, who he said, had a controversial past due to his affidavits in the Ishrat Jahan encounter killing case.

In its July 18 order, the apex court had accepted the majority of the Lodha Committee recommendations but the BCCI members turned against clauses like one state-one vote, 70-year age cap and nine-year cumulative period. This was despite the fact that the governing body of Indian cricket held three general body meetings – on October 1, October 15 and December 2 – with secretary Ajay Shirke proposing the house to accept all Lodha reforms and president Anurag Thakur seconding it. Even the Supreme Court’s October 21 order thatstoppedallbccifundstostateassociations (fornon-compliance)couldn’tforcethemembers to rethink. Only Vidarbha, Tripura and Hyderabad decided to fall in line.

But on December 17, Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) president Sharad Pawar steppeddownfollowinganemergentmanaging committee meeting. “While taking the decision regarding cricket, the Supreme Court has said that the officials should not be above 70 years of age and they have described these positions as ‘lucrative’ which made me very sad. That’s why I don’t wish to work anymore. Inreality,thepositionsarefilledthroughdemocraticmeans.sincetheseappointmentswere happening through democratic means, I was happy to work in that position,” Pawar, who is 76 years old, said in his resignation letter.

“Let’s wait for the court order. After that whoever will be there in the BCCI will decide thefuturepoliciesandcourseofaction,”saidan official demanding anonymity.

During the last hearing, the court had also said that the BCCI president was prima facie culpable under charges of contempt of court and perjury. The allegation against Thakur is that he apparently lied in his affidavit about seeking a letter from the ICC to assert that the appointment of a government watchdog, the CAG, in the BCCI and all state associations amounted to government interference.

Iccchairmanshashankmanohar,inhisresponse to the court’s query, said Thakur had indeedaskedforaletterbutherefusedtoissue itastherequestcameaftertheapexcourt’sjuly 18 ruling. Thakur’s affidavit, filed in October, said he had only sought a letter of “clarification”.“there’snoquestionofperjuryandihave notlied,”thakurhadsaidduringamediainteraction in Jaipur on December 21. Grapevine has it that ICC chief executive David Richardson,whospilledthebeansduringatv interview in September, has supported Thakur’s version of the affidavit.

But the matter has already been reserved for order and the bench will decide if Thakur should be prosecuted.