BCCI constitution can’t achieve transparency, accountability: SC
The Supreme Court said the constitution of the BCCI is highly incapable of achieving transparency, objectivity and accountability, values which can be attained only by changing it.Updated: May 03, 2016 23:19 IST
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the constitution of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is highly incapable of achieving transparency, objectivity and accountability, values which can be attained only by changing it.
“The inherent constitution of BCCI is such that it is highly incapable of achieving the values of transparency, objectivity and accountability that without changing its structure it can’t be done so,” a bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice FMI Kalifulla said.
The remarks were made after Senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, who was appointed as amicus curiae by the apex court to assist it on the issue, said if the constitution of BCCI does not allow the values to be achieved then it could be said to be illegal as the cricket board is discharging public function.
“You discharge public function but you want to enjoy private status. If you have public persona then you have to shed private persona. This cannot be done. It selects national team for the country, it cannot be a private society. It is a public entity,” Subramaniam said.
Justifying the recommendations of Justice RM Lodha panel for large-scale structural reforms, he said had the BCCI adhered to the constitutional values there would not have been need for recommendations.
“Recommendations are in right directions and the steps are in right direction to ensure that constitutional values are adhered to ensure institutional integrity,” he said, adding that BCCI is the beneficiary of the recommendations of Justice Lodha-led committee and if they are implemented it will help ensure the credibility of the institution.
The bench asked Subramaniam how it connected the two points that states which were earlier deprived of voting rights will have it now while the recommendation takes away the right from those that already had it.
The amicus curiae said the only ground which connects the two aspects is parity and every state should have been given equal opportunity.
He also suggested that in the IPL governing council, members of franchise should also be included to bring in more transparency.