Last Updated on 4 years ago by Charbel Coorey
Cricket News: Supreme Court begins hearing on BCCI plea to amend its constitution | BCCI pleads to court to review mandatory cooling off period
The Supreme Court (SC) of India has initiated the hearing on the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) plea to make multiple amendments in its constitution. It could potentially nullify many reforms brought about by the RM Lodha Committee that the apex court gave its nod to in 2018.
The BCCI had originally filed this plea in December 2019 and then submitted a fresh petition in April 2020. The board has been insisting on the court to hear the matter in recent times given that its verdict can have a major influence in its elections slated to be held late September.
BCCI pleads to Supreme Court to assess the mandatory cooling off period
The BCCI has pleaded before the court to assess the mandatory cooling off period for its office-bearers. It includes disqualifying the criteria for holding office and also reportedly provides unrivaled powers to the board secretary. Another request includes prohibiting the court from interfering provided that the BCCI alters its constitution in the future.
The re-drafted constitution of the BCCI requires an administrator to undergo a three-year cooling-off period after completing two consecutive terms (six years) either at the state association or the BCCI or a combination of both. Accordingly, the individual becomes ineligible to contest or hold any position in either the state association or the BCCI.
The new administration of the BCCI that came into power in September 2019 has contested this clause by demanding that the cooling off period must come into effect after an administrator has served consecutive terms (six years) at one place, i.e. either the state association or the BCCI and not a combination of both.
As of now, the five BCCI office-bearers, including president Sourav Ganguly, vice-president Rajiv Shukla, secretary Jay Shah, treasurer Arun Singh Dhumal and joint secretary Jayesh George have finished six consecutive years in some office at least. Shukla is also ineligible to serve as an office-bearer given that he is a Member of Parliament (MP) already.
A two-judge bench of the SC including Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli will resume the hearing on this issue on Wednesday afternoon. It is unclear if they will pass a judgment on the same then and there itself. Interestingly, Justice Chandrachud had passed the 2018 court judgment that the BCCI is seeking to amend now.
“Allowing an individual to act as an office bearer for six years in continuation is a sufficiently long period for experience and knowledge gained to be deployed in the interest of the game without at the same time resulting in a monopoly of power,” the SC judge had stated back then, as reported by ESPN Cricinfo.
Regarding the cooling-off period, he had written, “Cooling off must be accepted as a means to prevent a few individuals from regarding the administration of cricket as a personal turf. The game will be better off without cricketing oligopolies.” The fate of the incumbent BCCI administration rests in the hand of his bench, yet again.
