Opinion The chosen four
Supreme Court’s move to appoint a new panel to oversee cricket reform is steeped in questions.
The best argument about the need for the Supreme Court to involve itself as heavily as it has done in matters of cricket — by not only dismantling the existing structure of the board but also appointing a panel to run it — was that the board wouldn’t have reformed on its own. Indian cricket would have suffered if board officials weren’t pushed out. Those who have followed the goings-on in the IPL, teeming with conflict of interest issues and crony capitalism, probably agree with the court. However, it’s an argument that doesn’t sit well with critics who see in the apex court’s moves elements of judicial overreach.
Watch What Else Is Making News
Couldn’t the court have appointed a panel to amend the constitution of the BCCI to lay down rules for its elections and laws on how to function, instead of entering the business of running it? That’s the question, especially after the recent decision to appoint a four-member panel to oversee the administration of cricket in the near future. The composition of the panel seems unexceptionable: A former CAG, an eminent historian with affection for and erudition about cricket, a businessman who quit Wall Street to involve himself in public policy in India, and a cricketer with experience in administration. Vinod Rai, Ramachandra Guha, Vikram Limaye, and Diana Edulji cover all the bases. Yet the question is, still: How did the apex court arrive at these names? The selection procedure of a committee that aims to bring in transparency, professionalism, and structural reform in a sports organisation shouldn’t have been so opaque.
More importantly, how long does the Supreme Court intend to intervene in the running of cricket in the country? The court’s last few moves have only deepened the confusion. It appeared initially that the Lodha committee, which spent a year researching, interviewing and brainstorming to come up with solutions, would be the one to oversee the implementation of the order. After all, they had invested so much time and energy in it. Now that the decision has been taken to appoint people who are seen to be independent, they would need to start again from the beginning. A CEO, too, was appointed but that hasn’t quite solved the issue of how the game would be run as he doesn’t have the authority to force the state associations to do the bidding of the court. Hopefully, the new panel can do that. But already, it has invited questions — for instance, two of its members belong to the same organisation, with Rai and Limaye both on the board of IDFC. Marking out the way ahead for India’s cricket demands greater judgement and a longer term vision than has been evident so far.
Share
