Cooling-off period to be applied after 6 years at each level, but not in the event of a change of level
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday made major changes to the constitution of Cricket Board of Control in India (BCCI) which would give its president, secretary and officers the right to serve two consecutive six-year terms on the board of directors, even if they had served three years in state associations immediately before entering the BCCI.
A bench of judges DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohlithus, significantly amended the BCCI constitution approved by the SC in 2018, which had mandated a board member to undergo a three-year cooling-off period after two consecutive terms in a state association, or BCCI or cumulatively.
The previous constitution had mandated a person, who was a member of the office of a state association for three years, to calm down for three years after a three-year term in the BCCI. This clause prevented other stays at BCCI for its president Sourav Ganguly and its secretary Jay Shah for both had worked as office bearers in cricket associations in Bengal and Gujarat.
In December 2019, the BCCI AGM had unanimously passed resolutions to amend the constitution and its request for approval by the SC had been pending for more than two and a half years.
In accordance with the modified chill clause approved by the SC, an individual after two consecutive terms in a state association will be required to undergo a three-year chill period before running for state association election. He said the cooling-off period would not begin if he chose to move to the national level and run for the BCCI elections, where, once elected, he would be entitled to two more terms.
However, the SC maintained the earlier provision of the BCCI constitution to limit a person’s consecutive terms as a cricket director to a maximum of nine years. This means that if a board member had a six-year term in a state association, they could have an additional three-year term in BCCI. Conversely, if a person had a three-year term in a state association, they could have a six-year term in BCCI, after which the mandatory three-year cooling-off period would kick in.
The Judiciary accepted the changes proposed by the BCCI through the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta after these have been amended by the amicus curiae maninder singh to make them conform to judicial sentiments. These amendments would allow Ganguly and Shah to run again for the positions they hold.
The SC said the amendments would not disrupt the rationale for the cooling-off period – to prevent vested interests developing in one person and a clique forming within cricket administrations.
He also lifted the ban on board members of other sports bodies from being part of BCCI or state associations after stressing that BCCI and state associations should not be deprived of expertise. of certain eminent cricketers, who are associated with other sporting disciplines. .
In another significant amendment, the SC removed the disqualification of public office holders from serving in cricket administration as it was pointed out that some PSU officials play a huge role in promoting cricket in many areas from the country. Disqualification is now limited to ministers and bureaucrats only.
Accepting lead counsel Kapil Sibal’s suggestion to modify the previous clause disqualifying a person under judicial review of the charges against them, the bench said that from now on, only people who have been recognized guilty and sentenced to prison terms would be disqualified from challenging the BCCI or the state association. elections.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday made major changes to the constitution of Cricket Board of Control in India (BCCI) which would give its president, secretary and officers the right to serve two consecutive six-year terms on the board of directors, even if they had served three years in state associations immediately before entering the BCCI.
A bench of judges DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohlithus, significantly amended the BCCI constitution approved by the SC in 2018, which had mandated a board member to undergo a three-year cooling-off period after two consecutive terms in a state association, or BCCI or cumulatively.
The previous constitution had mandated a person, who was a member of the office of a state association for three years, to calm down for three years after a three-year term in the BCCI. This clause prevented other stays at BCCI for its president Sourav Ganguly and its secretary Jay Shah for both had worked as office bearers in cricket associations in Bengal and Gujarat.
In December 2019, the BCCI AGM had unanimously passed resolutions to amend the constitution and its request for approval by the SC had been pending for more than two and a half years.
In accordance with the modified chill clause approved by the SC, an individual after two consecutive terms in a state association will be required to undergo a three-year chill period before running for state association election. He said the cooling-off period would not begin if he chose to move to the national level and run for the BCCI elections, where, once elected, he would be entitled to two more terms.
However, the SC maintained the earlier provision of the BCCI constitution to limit a person’s consecutive terms as a cricket director to a maximum of nine years. This means that if a board member had a six-year term in a state association, they could have an additional three-year term in BCCI. Conversely, if a person had a three-year term in a state association, they could have a six-year term in BCCI, after which the mandatory three-year cooling-off period would kick in.
The Judiciary accepted the changes proposed by the BCCI through the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta after these have been amended by the amicus curiae maninder singh to make them conform to judicial sentiments. These amendments would allow Ganguly and Shah to run again for the positions they hold.
The SC said the amendments would not disrupt the rationale for the cooling-off period – to prevent vested interests developing in one person and a clique forming within cricket administrations.
He also lifted the ban on board members of other sports bodies from being part of BCCI or state associations after stressing that BCCI and state associations should not be deprived of expertise. of certain eminent cricketers, who are associated with other sporting disciplines. .
In another significant amendment, the SC removed the disqualification of public office holders from serving in cricket administration as it was pointed out that some PSU officials play a huge role in promoting cricket in many areas from the country. Disqualification is now limited to ministers and bureaucrats only.
Accepting lead counsel Kapil Sibal’s suggestion to modify the previous clause disqualifying a person under judicial review of the charges against them, the bench said that from now on, only people who have been recognized guilty and sentenced to prison terms would be disqualified from challenging the BCCI or the state association. elections.
