T.S.Krishnamurthy

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court-appointed observer for the conduct of elections to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), T.S. Krishnamurthy, has recommended amendment of the BCCI Constitution to ensure smooth elections in future.

The former Chief Election Commissioner was appointed as a consensus observer for the polls held on November 29 in which the Union Minister, Sharad Pawar was elected as the BCCI president. On December 12, the court had disposed of the petitions asking the contending parties to move appropriate forum for challenging the polls.

In his report, Mr. Krishnamurthy besides giving a detailed explanation on the procedure adopted for the conduct of the polls has made certain recommendations for implementation for future elections.

Substantial funds

He has stated, "in the interest of smooth elections in future to such a prestigious body handling substantial public funds, the BCCI Constitution needs a thorough review. There must be a provision for a Returning Officer, preparation of voters' list well in advance and proper nomination/voting procedure."

The report said: "The Constitution of the BCCI suffers from ambiguities/infirmities, especially in regard to the Rules relating to election procedure. For example, the Chairman's right to vote is not properly worded... As a result, there was a lot of controversy as to whether the Chairman at the AGM had an extra vote under Rule 27 apart from casting vote under Rule 26." It said: "Normally, members have equal voting right with the Chairman having a casting vote in case of a tie. However, in the BCCI elections in the past, the Chairman has been exercising an extra vote under Rule 27. This needs to be clarified either by a suitable amendment or a clarification by the apex court for future guidance." In some States, "there is more than one Association, while, in others, there is no Association. Though there is a procedure for new Associations applying for membership by becoming an associate member first before becoming a full member, some Associations have been making claims for full membership on the basis of change of name. The Constitution has to spell out the correct procedure."

Bring parity

He said though there were only 30 members as of now, there was an imbalance of voting rights because of some States having more than one member Association. "For example, Maharashtra has four members, Gujarat three and West Bengal two. This gives certain edge for some States in voting just because some of these associations have been in existence for a long time. If we have to respect the equality of States with equal voting rights in a national sports body, especially in view of large public funds collected by way of match tickets and TV rights from all over India, there is a case for bringing in parity in the matter of voting rights for all States. This needs to be looked into," the report said.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail