After three meetings of the Board of Control for Cricket in India's Disciplinary Committee, all of which were given a miss by Lalit Modi, the man in the centre of the storm, it was decided that there would be no further recusals.
Or, to put it in simple English, the Committee will continue to comprise Chirayu Amin, the interim IPL chief, Arun Jaitley, senior BJP leader and BCCI vice-president and Jyotiraditya Scindia, president of the Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association and a sitting Congress MP from Gwalior.
Modi and his lawyers had argued that both Amin and Jaitley should step down from the Disciplinary Committee on the grounds that the former was part of a failed bid for an IPL team and that the latter had voted to ratify charges against Modi as president of the Delhi & Districts Cricket Association.
On Wednesday, the BCCI only stated that “the request of Mr. Lalit Modi for recusal of certain members of the Disciplinary Committee is rejected,” and added that the next meeting would be held on August 18. A source close to the developments, however, revealed that this was always going to be the likely outcome, despite Modi's best efforts.
Essentially, the Board's argument could have gone along the lines that as Modi enjoyed all the privileges the BCCI constitution bestowed on an office bearer, he would also have to accept the fact that he would be judged by a jury of his peers. The source, who is familiar with the BCCI constitution, added that there existed no provision in the constitution for a suspended office bearer to be tried by a committee of persons from outside the BCCI.
{{/usCountry}}Essentially, the Board's argument could have gone along the lines that as Modi enjoyed all the privileges the BCCI constitution bestowed on an office bearer, he would also have to accept the fact that he would be judged by a jury of his peers. The source, who is familiar with the BCCI constitution, added that there existed no provision in the constitution for a suspended office bearer to be tried by a committee of persons from outside the BCCI.
{{/usCountry}}The Board could have argued that since the authority of the Disciplinary Committee stemmed from the constitution, Modi's demand to be judged by someone who was not connected to the BCCI would amount to devaluing the constitution and amount to frustrating the proceedings.
Modi was already refused relief by the Bombay High Court when he alleged that there was an "institutional bias" against him. The Court then ruled that Modi would have the right to appeal any decision the Disciplinary Committee finally arrived at.
Wednesday's verdict means that the Disciplinary Committee can finally begin the task it was assigned - addressing the charges levelled against Modi.
What remains to be seen is whether Modi, who has been on holiday in Sardinia, Monaco, England, South Africa and Bali since the Board began proceedings against him, will actually appear before the committee.