Can’t micro-manage BCCI functioning, says SC; to pass order on the tenure of office bearers.
Can’t micro-manage BCCI functioning, says SC; to pass order on the tenure of office bearers. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court asked the BCCI why it wanted people over 70 to represent the country in the ICC and noted that the BCCI is an autonomous body and cannot micro-manage its functioning.
The comments were made during a hearing on a petition by the Board to change its constitution to remove the mandatory cooling-off.
It is in the period between the terms of office for all state cricket associations, and the BCCI would affect the terms of the Board’s President, Sourav Ganguly, and its Secretary, Jay Shah.
The Supreme Court has stated that it will not abolish the cooling off period between the terms of office bearers because “the aim of the cooling off period is that there should be no vested interest.” The hearing is scheduled to continue on Wednesday, and the Court is expected to issue an order.
Those holding elective positions in the BCCI must wait three years between terms in office, whether at the state level or at the central organization. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, arguing on behalf of BCCI before Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli, began by stating that cricket in India has been greatly simplified.
According to his argument, the Supreme Court has indicated that amendments to the bylaws will be possible with its approval once they enter operational readiness.
He assured everyone that the BCCI operates independently and that the organization’s AGM has carefully evaluated all of the proposed modifications.
The bench stated, “BCCI is an autonomous entity,” as the argument was being presented. When asked how the government should operate, Mehta replied, “As the constitution stands now, there is a cooling-off time. There must be cooling down time between my terms as president of the state cricket association and the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
He went on to say that the two organizations have different rules and procedures and that two consecutive terms in office are not enough to cultivate leadership at the grassroots level.
According to the Solicitor General, “Leadership emerges at the grassroots level and it remains in the state association. When the time comes for him to be promoted to the BCCI, he will first have to serve a mandated three-year “cooling off” period.
Joining the BCCI is impossible if you are not already a member of your respective state’s governing body. He continued, saying that a BCCI official’s time spent as a state association official shouldn’t count against the mandatory waiting period.
As arguments were presented, we are engaged in conversation and not passing judgment,” Justice Chandrachud said. People on social media may interpret our words in court as a verdict. Still, in reality, our role in the legal system is to facilitate discussion and a better understanding of the facts at hand.
According to the bench, the current constitution mandates a three-year waiting time before a state association member can serve in the same capacity in the BCCI.
According to Mehta, a cooling-off period after two consecutive terms in BCCI will ensure that the experience of “qualified administrators” is not wasted and address the court’s concern that no one should perpetually remain in command in the cricket organization. The second change, he explained, would remove the age cap of 70 for the BCCI’s presence on the International Cricket Body’s governing council.
Why send persons over the bench asked why to send persons over the age of 70 to represent us in the International Criminal Court people who are 70 or older have not accomplished great things, but this is a competitive arena. The Attorney General of the United States is over the age of 70, and some outstanding medical professionals are also over the age of 70.
According to Mehta, the ICC is a body that decides how much money should be allocated to each country. Former leaders of international cricket organizations are in intense negotiations.
For my young man to succeed in cricket, he will have to compete with these seasoned pros who have been playing for 30–40 years.
He further noted that the ICC welcomes applicants of all ages from all around the world. Do you mean to claim that the Cricket Australia Board or the England and Wales Cricket Board do not have any age requirements for ICC representation?” the bench asked. Give us access to the documentation. No relevant evidence has been presented to us at this time. You set the stage”.
The bench has directed senior advocate and amicus curiae Maninder Singh to compile all the data before the next hearing on Wednesday.
The bench has indicated that it will follow suit and issue the order. According to Singh’s proposal, a person should be able to serve for two consecutive terms of six years in the cricket body without having to go through the obligatory three-year cooling-off period if he has previously served as an office bearer of a state association for three years.
With the proposed change, Sourav Ganguly and Jay Shah would be able to remain in their positions as President and Secretary of the BCCI, respectively, despite having served for six years in their respective state cricket organizations.
Before now, the Supreme Court had accepted the reforms in the BCCI that were suggested by the committee chaired by Justice R M Lodha.