Whitewash job

There is a lot in American jurisprudence that is worthy of emulation: its speed, its sensitivity, its commitment to consider every point of...

There is a lot in American jurisprudence that is worthy of emulation: its speed, its sensitivity, its commitment to consider every point of view. But in the hearings on match-fixing, we have chosen to emulate its worst attribute: the trial as public entertainment. Y.B. Chandrachud holds court in the business centre of a hotel, interviews8217; his respondents informally in camera, does not take evidence his notings will not be accepted as such in a court of law, and lets them off without probing too much. In fact, he does not have the wherewithal to probe at all and they part on the most convivial of terms. The only people excited about the proceedings, it appears, are the hordes of newsmen who descended on the hotel. This is merely a media event, one of those meets where the men in flannel get together to discuss the inscrutable technicalities of their game, evaluate insults traded in the past or discuss whether the presence of bottle-caps on the field has consequences for the gentlemen8217;s game. On the contrary, however, a very serious issue is at stake in Chandrachud8217;s investigation.

The amount allegedly offered to Manoj Prabhakar may seem to be piffling in this age of financial scams, but it ought to be remembered that it represents only a part of much larger transactions. Test cricket is no longer merely a gentlemen8217;s game. It is heavily corporatised, extremely competitive, calls for very high investments and is played for high stakes. The existence of a betting network associated with it is inevitable. But this network should not be allowed to infiltrate the institutions of the game itself and decide outcomes according to its interests. That would amount to handing it over to a civilised mafia. The Americans had to deal firmly with betting-related violence in boxing, baseball and football, their three most popular sports, near the middle of the century. India will have to do the same for cricket if Prabhakar8217;s allegations are indeed true 8212; or face the unpleasant consequences of its criminalisation. Chandrachud8217;s investigation ought not to be a mere photo-opportunity for the ladies and gentlemen of the Press. It should be taken seriously by every institution associated with the game, because their future credibility could depend on it. If betting is as rampant as it is made out to be, the BCCI could soon find its own decisions being taken out of its hands. So this investigation ought to be empowered to go out and investigate. It serves no purpose dallying in hotel rooms, chatting up cricketers.

It cannot hope to remain quasi-judicial and yet unearth evidence. As Prabhakar8217;s counsel has pointed out, his client can do without a defamation case right now. In short, it needs to be taken seriously. But the future is depressingly clear. The designated authority will go through the motions of an investigation, discover very little, yet consistently succeed in making the headlines. And then someone will recall that Prabhakar has always had a problem with curbing his tongue, and that he was often in trouble with the cricketing establishment. And finally, the whitewash job will be given a quiet burial.