HOW THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT IS STRATEGICALLY SILENT ON BRINGING BCCI UNDER RTI ACT, LETTING THE BOARD'S EMPLOYEES RUN THE DOMESTIC CRICKET

By QAISER MOHAMMAD ALI, Outlook magazine, issue August 13, 2018

FOR several years, the central government has been making an effort to bring the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, like all National Sports Federations (NSFs). But the Board has been steadfastly, even audaciously, stonewalling the government, thanks to the full backing of politicians who have been -- and still are -- part of it. Successive dispensations, too, have never really been serious about implementing it.

While defying government RTI orders with disdain, the main thrust of BCCI’s defiance—and on which it has been harping unashamedly—has been that it doesn’t take financial assistance from the government. That is only partly true, as it does take indirect, ‘substantial assistance’, as the Delhi High Court observed some years ago and something the Union sports ministry, too, keeps insisting. And, crucially, the men who are the foundational support to the superstructure of BCCI-run tournaments—match officials who run things on the ground—are employees of government institutions.

It’s a matter on which the BCCI conveniently, and consistently, keeps mum. This April, The Law Commission of India (LCI) in a report prepared on directions of the Supreme Court, recommended that the RTI Act be made applicable to the BCCI and all its state affiliates. In addition, the Supreme Court has concluded, in the famous ‘BCCI versus Netaji Cricket Club (Chennai)’ case of 2005—and even in the Zee Telefilms vs Union of India case—that the Board “exercises enormous public functions” and “state-like functions”. These include selection of national teams that are fielded in global tournaments, with players/officials wearing the Indian national logo using the word ‘India’, which is part of the Emblem Act. 

The main governmental assistance to the BCCI comes in the form of heavily subsidised land provided for constructing stadiums, income tax/customs exemption—between 1997 and 2007, the government gave an exemption of Rs 2,168 crore—and civic/security services etc.. “Whenever the BCCI faced difficulty in obtaining customs duty exemption it approached this ministry, seeking a certificate that announced it is a recognised NSF for cricket. The ministry has issued such certificates in favour of the BCCI,” the Union sports ministry in December 2011 said in its reply to the Central Information Commission (CIC), supporting an application that had sought that the BCCI be declared a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act.

However, strangely and surprisingly, while listing the assistance it provides to the BCCI, the government never highlighted the most important support it provides—match officials. They conduct various domestic tournaments and are thus the pillars, as well as the nuts and bolts, without which the entire BCCI edifice would collapse. Had the sports ministry in its various reports/replies to Parliament questions raised this point, the BCCI would have been defenceless. A case could thus have been built for it to come under the RTI ambit and share information, particularly financial, that it fiercely shields.

Two top sports ministry officials who handled the BCCI-RTI Act issue during sports minister Lalit Maken’s short tenure in 2011-2012 now candidly admit to have erred in overlooking this vital aspect. “Yes, we didn’t realise this at the time. If we had flagged this issue with the BCCI, it would have been better because the Board benefited from these umpires and scorers etc. who are actually government employees,” one official tells Outlook. The other concurred with his colleague’s views. 

So, who are these match officials and how are they so important for the BCCI? They are umpires, referees, scorers, and video analysts—and, in many instances, even coaches and players. A significant number of them are government employees who double up as cricket officials during the domestic cricket season in winter after taking legitimate/special leave from their offices. 

Veritably, the number of match officials —all freelancers, trained by the BCCI—is colossal. The BCCI uses close to 500 match officials—the world’s largest such contingent—comprising umpires, referees, scorers and video analysts. Of 97 umpires and 58 match referees, the people who conduct matches, a substantial number are government employees. Besides, there are many referees, scorers and video analysts who work in various government institutions, mainly banks. 

It’s surprising how long the roster is—the Reserve Bank of India, State Bank of India, Comptroller and Attorney General, Dena Bank, Canara Bank, Vijaya Bank, Oriental Bank Corporation, Punjab National Bank, Indian Railways, Services, Indian Oil, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, Food Corporation of India, Income Tax Department, Accountant General, India Post, BSNL, and Life Insurance Corporation. 

Although the BCCI is the world’s richest cricket body, it cannot employ nearly 500 officials permanently, simply because they wouldn’t have anything to do in the off season. It makes business sense for the BCCI to hire them professionally, only during the domestic season. The question here is not whether government employees can conduct BCCI matches; they are free to pursue their passion. The issue is of dogged resistance by the Board to become accountable and transparent under the RTI Act. But, as the ministry officials admitted, the government has itself to blame for giving the BCCI a long rope. If it sincerely wanted to force the BCCI, it could have told it something like this: ‘Look, you are heavily dependent on us in many areas. If you don’t come under the RTI Act, we would not grant leave to our employees to work in your tournaments as match officials.’ 

Indeed, government employees take leave to officiate in matches. Of course, some banks are aware of what their employees do, but still sportingly oblige their employees, and indirectly, the BCCI. “I worked for 28 years with Syndicate Bank in Bangalore, before retiring in 2008. My bank was very cooperative in granting leave within the rules so that I could officiate in matches. I would attach the BCCI letter of assignment while applying for leave,” Shavir Tarapore, a former ICC International Panel umpire and ex-Karnataka cricketer, tells Outlook. 

It is said that due to his insistence on BCCI coming under the RTI Act, the Congress-led UPA government removed Maken in October 2012, after barely 20 months in office. It must be remembered that at the time, influential Congress party ministers Jyotiraditya Scindia and Rajeev Shukla, along with the BJP’s Arun Jaitley called the shots in the BCCI. They also headed three of the Board’s state affiliates. Over the years, whenever it has come to shielding the BCCI from becoming accountable, politicians have joined hands to scotch all such attempts. 

Also, a few RTI activists have over the years tried, though unsuccessfully, to eke out information, particularly about finances, from the BCCI. Besides, some people allege that the BCCI even “bought out” some RTI activists who wanted it to be declared a ‘public authority’. Such talk gained ground when they often failed to appear before the CIC when summoned. 

As the blockbuster 2018-19 domestic cricket season, comprising a whopping 2,017 matches, is set to start on August 13, there are apprehensions about the BCCI managing to deploy umpires, referees, scorers and video analysts smoothly. Be that as it may, the Board would, for the umpteenth time, bank heavily on banks and other government institutions for the indispensable match officials. Freely partaking of the government’s beneficence, the BCCI quails only when the issue of its coming under the RTI umbrella arises.

BCCI budgets Rs. 330.32 crore to fight IPL fixing-betting case in Supreme Court (Exclusive)

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali (Mail Today) 

New Delhi, December 23, 2014: Jittery BCCI mandarins seem to have anticipated that the ongoing high-profile 2013 IPL betting-fixing case in the Supreme Court would drag on for a long period and that’s probably why it has earmarked a fund just to meet the expenses, including a huge lawyers’ bill.
 
The BCCI, the richest cricket board in the world, has set aside an exigency fund of Rs. 330.32 crore, specifically to meet the expenses of this case. This amount, according to a top BCCI source, is part of Rs. 1,150.67 crore that the BCCI has invested in Fixed Deposits (FDs) in banks.
 
If BCCI officials had indeed anticipated a long drawn battle in the complicated case, in which a lot is at stake for sidelined president N. Srinivasan, his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, and IPL franchises — Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals, they were not off target.
 
“That is why the Board has kept aside a specific fund for the ongoing case in the Supreme Court. If all of this Rs. 330.32 crore is not utilised, the leftover amount will be used for some other meaningful purpose,” the source told Mail Today. “So, after Rs. 330.32 crore is taken out of the total of Rs. 1,150.67 crore invested in the FDs, the Board is actually left with only Rs. 785 crore,” he stressed, hinting at a none-too-happy situation so far funds are concerned.
 
The source further disclosed: “The BCCI currently has $18.5million approximately (Rs. 116.90 crore) Exchange Earners' Foreign Currency Account (EEFC) while there is Rs. 134 crore in the various savings accounts.”
 
The Supreme Court case, being fought on a PIL filed by unrecognised Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), has now gone on for almost one-and- a-half years. However, the arguments by the parties are now over and the two-member bench, comprising Justices T.S. Thakur and Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, has reserved the judgement, which is expected to be delivered early next month when the court reopens after the winter vacation.
 
The BCCI/Srinivasan have hired the services of some of the top-of-the-line lawyers like Kapil Sibal and C.A. Sundram, and the Board realised that it would particularly need a large fund to meet their lawyers’ fees and related sundry expenses, like travelling etc. This case and other court battles, besides a spate of tax demands running into hundreds of crores of rupees and arbitration proceedings against several clients, has forced the BCCI on the back foot and juggle its funds.
 
This is corroborated by BCCI’s decision to break many of its Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) prematurely during financial year 2012-13 to meet various pressing fund requirements. It encashed 17 FDRs, ranging between periods of 181 days to one year, which were worth Rs. 130 crore.
 
More recently, the standing committee of finance (2014-15) of the 16th Lok Sabha, in its 31-page report, which mostly deals with the BCCI/IPL’s commercial aspect, came down heavily on tax authorities for being “very lenient” on the Board.
 
In some cases, the probe by the tax authorities, including the Enforcement Directorate, continues. “The committee are, however, not satisfied with the progress of investigations in the matter, as already much time has passed without any outcome by way of penal action in these cases. The committee, therefore, would like the government to conclude the investigations in the matter expeditiously and apprise the committee of the outcome thereof,” wrote M. Veerappa Moily, chairperson of the committee on finance.
 
(This story was first published in Mail Today newspaper on December 23, 2014)