RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT

BCCI a public body, must come under RTI: Law Commission

by Dhananjay Mahapatra • Last updated on

If the government accepts the commission's recommendations and classifies BCCI as a public body or an organisation under the RTI Act, anyone can file PILs in the SC or HCs questioning the selection of players representing India, states and zones. © Agencies

The Law Commission is ready with a set of recommendations to make BCCI a 'public body' or, in the alternative, a private body amenable to queries from the public under the Right to Information Act.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the world's richest cricket body, operates as a private entity under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act.

Law Commission chairman Justice B S Chauhan told TOI that the panel had finalised its report on BCCI which would soon be submitted to law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. "We have found that BCCI is eminently qualified to be classified as 'state' under Article 12 of the Constitution," Justice Chauhan said.

The fallout of a body getting classified as 'state' is that it would be subject to constitutional checks by the Supreme Court and high courts, and would face PILs questioning the fairness of its decisions.

Sources told TOI the law panel unanimously concluded that given BCCI's monopoly over the most popular and cash-rich game in India and its public nature of work, coupled with substantial financing from governments over the years in the form of tax exemptions and allotment of land, it must be classified as a 'public body' and brought under the RTI Act. In its July 2016 judgment, the SC had asked the commission to examine the legal framework to bring BCCI under the RTI Act.

If the government accepts the commission's recommendations and classifies BCCI as a public body or an organisation under the RTI Act, anyone can file PILs in the SC or HCs questioning the selection of players representing India, states and zones. PILs could also question the agreements signed by BCCI with other cricket playing nations and the International Cricket Council.

The report was finalised after exhaustive examination of law, SC judgments and views from the public by Justice Chauhan and members Justice Ravi R Tripathi, S Sivakumar and Sanjay Singh. The panel justified labelling BCCI as a 'public body' by saying the board had always aligned its cricketing relations with other countries as per the government's foreign policy.

Moreover, Indian players displayed the national colours on their kit and sported Ashok Chakras on their helmets. BCCI nominated players for Arjuna awards and invariably, a politician owing allegiance to the ruling party headed the board. The panel cited BCCI presidentships of N K P Salve, Madhavrao Scindia, R S Mahendra, Sharad Pawar and Anurag Thakur to back its conclusions.

Non-consideration of BCCI's monopolistic role in regulating cricket had led to the board ducking under the RTI Act to encourage an environment of "opacity and non-accountability", sources said.

Recalling a statement by the sports minister in Lok Sabha that the government already regarded BCCI as a national sports federation, the commission recommended that for removal of any doubt, the board may be explicitly mentioned in the list of NSFs given on the ministry's website. "This express mention will automatically bring BCCI within the purview of RTI Act," a source said.

© TNN