& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

BCB and ICC's new governance regime

Saber H. Chowdhury
A new Board is at the helm of Bangladesh cricket.
However, uncertainty as to whether this Board will sustain persists, given the Appellate Division's judgment that Bangladesh Cricket Board's (BCB) elections under National Sports Council's (NSC) amended constitution can take place, subject to results of ongoing appeals on a High Court judgment that had earlier held this constitution to be illegal and having no legal effect.
In essence, the appeals rest on fundamental and interesting points of law that include; can power once delegated (by NSC to BCB) and legitimately exercised (by BCB), be thereafter taken back (by NSC from BCB)?
Why the NSC and BCB chose to pursue a ruling from the Appellate Division to enable them to push ahead with a half-baked election under a disputed constitution, instead of asking for a Hearing on the appeals to determine once for all the legality of the constitution, is of course a legitimate concern and question.
Whilst the legal process plays out in Bangladesh's highest Court and we wait for the Appellate Division to rule finally on the matter, recent developments in our cricket merit a closer and necessary look on the critical question of to what extent the BCB is free of government control in context of International Cricket Council's (ICC) new governance regime.
Under the distinguished Chairmanship of Rt. Hon. The Lord Woolf of Barnes, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (2000-2005), ICC had carried out an independent governance review based on which amendments to ICC's Articles were adopted by its full council in 2011.
Accordingly, BCB, as with other ICC member Boards, is now obligated to comply with these new requirements relating to "Independence of Member Boards" and provide for (1) free and fair elections to its Board of Directors and (2) prohibit government interference in administration of the game.
Importantly, BCB is required to ensure that the processes necessary to achieve this are adopted, faithfully and appropriately, in its constitution.
As per the BCB president, its new constitution is fully compliant with ICC's above requirements. In fact, both the BCB and the NSC, through the attorney general and heavyweight lawyers, have robustly represented to the highest courts of the land that this new constitution has been drawn up as per "instructions" of none other than the ICC itself and, going further, asserted in their submissions that it is ICC's "model and standard constitution.”
Per ICC's requirements, members of BCB Board must be elected to that position by virtue of either a free and fair elec- toral process involving the membership, or be appointed to that position by the members themselves.
However, BCB's constitution provides for NSC to nominate three directors to its Board, and these nominated directors neither have to go through a process of election, nor are they appointed to the Board by the Board itself. In fact, under this government quota, in the recent BCB elections NSC duly nominated three directors, including one who was subsequently elected as president of the BCB 1
Compare and contrast this with provisions of the constitution approved in BCB's EGM of March 2012 (which, by the way, both NSC and NSC appointed BCB's Ad Hoc Committee found most convenient and expedient to ignore) that provided for the president to be elected by direct vote of all the councilors of BCB.
We thus have a situation where, under the present Constitution, even the president of BCB owes his position to a nomination by NSC, in flagrant disregard of ICC's stipulations on non-interference by the government in the administration of cricket in Bangladesh as well as provisions of free and fair elections.
Interestingly, not only does NSC nominate directors to the BCB Board, it continues to retain its absolute right and authority, based on National Sports Council Act, to dissolve BCB's Board of Directors at any time, as with Executive Committee of any national sporting body, and no steps have been taken by BCB to protect/insulate itself from possible future application of this draconian law.
The flip side of relying on government patronage to get elected is that the same hand can strike and bite at a later date, and this has not been unknown to happen.
This constitution also institutionalises government control and scope to meddle and interfere in affairs of BCB, given that NSC is the authorised body to conduct its elections and is also the sole and mandated authority for arbitration on all matters relating to functioning of BCB.
How equitably, transparently and fairly NSC conducts such elections was clearly evident in the recent polls when, over a mere few days, BCB's controversial voter list was adopted as NSC's own and all appeals from aggrieved councilors on a range of legitimate issues having sound merit were unexcep-tionally rejected.
Consistent with this agenda and scheme of institutionalising government control and influence over the BCB, the NSC imposed constitution now also provides for presidents of District and Divisional Sports Associations (government appointed bureaucrats) in their individual capacity to nominate 71 councilors who will then go on to elect 10 of BCB's 27 directors.
One, thus, does not have to dig deep to see that as per provi-
sions of BCB's constitution, the government can interfere, directly and/or indirectly, and nominate no fewer than 13 members to BCB's Board and, as the recent elections demonstrate, this includes the post of president of BCB as well.
This is not a numbers game and even one nominated director would be one too many as per ICC's Articles, but it just shows how far away we are from compliance in terms of free elections as well as zero government influence.
Rewind 13 years to BCB's AGM in Cox's Bazaar. We had the courage and wisdom then to understand that Bangladesh cricket needed to be free of government control and influence and resolved that future presidents of BCB would be democratically elected instead of being selected. In 2013, this sadly remains an unfinished agenda and needs to be corrected, sooner the better.
What I find astonishing is how, in light of above conflicts and contradictions, the BCB can regard this constitution as being a model and standard constitution of the ICC itself, and has represented accordingly to the Supreme Court of Bangladesh.
If ICC has indeed endorsed this constitution as the BCB president maintains, it would essentially mean that the guardian of global cricket has violated its own Articles. If not, and it is the BCB that has been misrepresenting, then it is most serious and alarming. Clarity in either event is thus an urgent imperative, as is the need to bring and hold the concerned to account thereafter.
Regardless of whether it has been taken for a ride by certain quarters or it has misdirected itself and not exercised due caution and proper diligence, it would appear in this instance that ICC has undermined the very standards of governance it espouses and now requires all member Boards to aspire and adhere to.
Cricket today is a global sport that merits and demands highest standards and excellence in governance - including management, integrity and ethics -nationally, regionally and internationally.
To quote Lord Woolf from the Governance Review: "Cricket has a unique position in the sporting world. It is synonymous with fairness and integrity, exemplified by common referrals to 'the spirit of cricket' and 'it's just not cricket.' Cricket's values are integral to the game and its future. They are perceived by the public as being instrumental to cricket's long-standing success."
We need to find the resolve and integrity within our own selves, at all levels, to embrace these values and embed them in our cricket and social fabric as Bangladesh cricket hopefully marches forward, on and off the field.
The writer is a Member of Parliament, Bangladesh.
E-mail: saber.chowdhury@gmail.com