BCCI not functioning in coherent, cohesive manner, says Justice RM Lodha
Justice R.M. Lodha has said that the BCCI has been functioning in a manner that isn’t coherent or cohesive. However, he remained optimistic that his suggested reforms would be implemented.cricket Updated: Jul 24, 2017 23:38 IST
Justice (retired) RM Lodha said on Monday that the functioning of the Board of Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) has not been very coherent and cohesive.
His statement comes in the backdrop of the BCCI’s failure to implement the recommendations of the panel headed by him.
It has been a year and the BCCI has still not accepted the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha Committee’s recommendations in toto.
Earlier, in a landmark judgment on July 18, 2016, the Supreme Court accepted major recommendations of Justice RM Lodha-led panel on structural reforms in the BCCI and had given six months deadline to the board implement the recommendations.
On October 1, the board had accepted many of the “significant recommendations” of the Lodha Committee, but excluded the important ones which have been a bone of contention between the cricket body and the Lodha Panel.
The recommendations, which have still not been accepted by BCCI committee, include one-state one-vote, age limit of 70 years, cooling-off period of three years which included the tenure of the administrators, continue with the five selectors and retaining the powers of the president and secretary as per the earlier constitution of the board.
Despite this scenario, RM Lodha said that he was ‘positive’ about the implementation of reforms any time soon.
In an exclusive conversation with ANI, RM Lodha said, “Perhaps, the Supreme Court wants to see the intention of BCCI. They want to ensure that the reforms, which we suggested and which have been accepted by the court, are implemented by the BCCI. And, should they come with any difficulty; the Supreme Court will have to look at that. So, let us be positive about it right now.”
“The Supreme Court has passed its judgment on July 18, 2016, accepting the reforms and barring one or two. I am informed that review petition against that order has already been dismissed. The acuity petition has also been unsuccessful. So, all the judicial channels known to law have been exhausted,” he added.
He rued that it has already been almost a year that “there has not been implementation of our reforms by BCCI”.
“Right now, I think the function of the BCCI has not been in a very coherent, cohesive manner. That is why certain things have happened which should not have happened. But, let us hope for the best,” he said.
On January 30, the apex court had appointed a four-member Committee of Administrators, led by Vinod Rai, along with noted historian Ramachandra Guha, managing director of IDFC Limited Vikram Limaye and former captain of the women’s cricket team Diana Edulji as other administrators in order to help BCCI and state associations to implement the Lodha Committee recommendations.
Reflecting on the efforts of the Committee of Administrators towards the implementation of Lodha reforms, Justice RM Lodha said, “COA’s task was to implement our reforms which were accepted by the Supreme Court. That was the primary task, but unfortunately that has not been done. The COA was perhaps forced to engage in these matters and that has taken their time. But, they must be trying their best to implement the reforms.”
Meanwhile, the BCCI on June 23 also constituted a seven-member committee to see how the Lodha Panel recommendations are implemented by the board in the best possible and swiftest manner.
The committee, headed by Indian Premier League (IPL) chairman Rajeev Shukla, with Amitabh as its convener, has Sourav Ganguly, T.C. Mathew, Naba Bhattacharjee, Jay Shah and Anirudh Chaudhry as its other members.
The mandate of the committee was to “identify the few critical points in respect of the said judgement for the general body of the BCCI to consider before its submission to the Supreme Court”.
On July 8, it expressed reservations on four points of the Lodha Panel recommendations namely one state one vote, team selection panel, cooling off and demarcation functions of professionals and official bearers.