{"id":40422,"date":"2018-08-28T09:09:57","date_gmt":"2018-08-28T09:09:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/?p=40422"},"modified":"2018-08-28T09:09:57","modified_gmt":"2018-08-28T09:09:57","slug":"bcci-constitution-no-clarity-over-tenure-of-bcci-officials","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/bcci-constitution-no-clarity-over-tenure-of-bcci-officials\/","title":{"rendered":"BCCI Constitution: No clarity over tenure of BCCI officials"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

For seeking clarification on this clause that acting secretary of the board, Amitabh Choudhary, is learnt to have moved court. Confusion continues to reign over the contentious \u201ctenure clause\u201d of the office-bearers in the new BCCI constitution, which came into effect on August 21. So does an office-bearer become ineligible for a BCCI post after he or she has served nine years for a state association or vice versa? Or will these tenures be counted as independent of each other? And it is for seeking clarification on this clause that acting secretary of the board, Amitabh Choudhary, is learnt to have moved court. The new BCCI constitution says, a person \u201cshall be disqualified\u201d from being an office-bearer\/IPL governing council member\/BCCI committee member\/BCCI\u2019s representative to the ICC if he\/she among others \u201chas been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative period of 9 years or of a State Association for a cumulative period of 9 years\u201d\u2026 The apex court in its orders on January 20, 2017 and March 24, 2017 had clarified that the maximum tenure of an office-bearer, the BCCI and state association combined, would be 18 years \u2013 nine plus nine \u2014in total. \u201cIf a person has held the post of office bearer in respect of a State Association for a period of nine years, he will not be disqualified to contest for the post of office bearer of the BCCI,\u201d the court orders had said. The lack of clarity on the issue has remained from the time the Lodha committee had originally asked for the tenures of BCCI officials to be limited to three years of three terms each. Even the Supreme Court\u2019s order on August 9 mentions the respective tenures at BCCI and state levels separately under the topic \u2018election and term of office bearers . No person shall hold the position of an office bearer in any state association, regardless of post, for a period in excess of nine years in the aggregate\u201d and \u201cNo person shall hold the post of office bearer in BCCI, regardless of post, for a period in excess of nine years in the aggregate,\u201d it reads.<\/p>\n

When asked about the matter following the CoA meeting in Delhi on Monday, committee chairman Vinod Rai insisted on not wanting to give the \u201cBCCI interpretation of the clause\u201d since the matter was now in court. The order of the Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court is exceedingly clear. There\u2019s no two ways about that. However, since some people have approached the court, I don\u2019t want to give the BCCI interpretation of it. The BCCI doesn\u2019t give interpretation to these legal issues. It is for the states to follow them. I don\u2019t want to talk about it upfront because this issue has been raised in the court. Let it be clarified by the court if the court deems it necessary to clarify,\u201d he said. When pressed about his own understanding of the issue, Rai said, \u201cWe have a certain understanding but I don\u2019t want to state that understanding just now. Whatever we have to say on this issue we will do so in the court. The new constitution is very clear. It comes across very clearly. Can or can\u2019t [a person disqualified at state wanting to become a BCCI office-bearer], I don\u2019t want to get into. I would have if it had not been raised before the court,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n

A BCCI official, on the other hand, observed that the CoA had \u201ctaken liberties\u201d with some other aspects too in the constitution, not restricted to the \u201cnine-year clause\u201d quandary. As per the new constitution, no office-bearer can be part of the IPL governing council or any BCCI or state association committee during the three-year cooling-off period, applicable after two consecutive terms of three years each in office. I don\u2019t think this is in accordance with the Supreme Court order,\u201d said the official on condition of anonymity. Meanwhile, Rai said the CoA plans to hold the BCCI elections within \u201c90 days\u201d of registering the new constitution. First, the state associations will hold their respective AGMs\/elections after adopting their new constitutions in sync with the cricket board constitution. Then they will nominate their representatives for the BCCI and accordingly the cricket board elections will be conducted. BCCI elections will happen in 90 days and that\u2019s the deadline we have given ourselves. The moment the new body takes over, the COA will leave. We would do exactly what Justice Vikramjit Sen did (handover reins to DDCA\u2019s elected body),\u201d Rai told mediapersons here today.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For seeking clarification on this clause that acting secretary of the board, Amitabh Choudhary, is learnt to have moved court. Confusion continues to reign over the contentious \u201ctenure clause\u201d of the office-bearers in the new BCCI constitution, which came into effect on August 21. So does an office-bearer become ineligible for a BCCI post after […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":40423,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[122],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40422","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-sports"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40422","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40422"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40422\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40424,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40422\/revisions\/40424"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40423"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40422"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40422"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blastingskyhawk.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40422"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}