Recently Supreme Court has accepted most of the recommendations presented by Lodha Committee in its report for BCCI reforms.
Need for reforms and recommendations by Lodha Committee
- Structural problems
Bihar, Chhattisgarh,Uttarakhand and six North-Eastern States (Sikkim, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram) are unrepresented on the Board.
Maharashtra and Gujarat have 3 Full Members, each representing parts of their respective States.
Maharashtra exercises votes through the Associations of Mumbai, Vidarbha and Maharashtra while Gujarat fields the Associations of Baroda, Gujarat and Saurashtra.
Unrepresented Union Territories
Except for Delhi, none of the other six Union Territories are Full Members of the BCCI.
Some members do not represent territories
Members like Services Sports Control Board, the Railways Sport Promotion Board and All India Universities do not represent any territory.
Some members neither play matches nor represent territories
Some of the members in this category are: National Cricket Club (NCC) at Kolkata and the Cricket Club of India (CCI) at Mumbai
Arbitrary addition and removal of associations
Despite being a Full Member, the Rajasthan Cricket Association has been treated as disenfranchised, resulting in the players of the State being forced to move elsewhere to compete.
Recommendations by Lodha committee
- Committee proposes the policy of ‘One State – One Member – One Vote’.
- There should be no place for multiple associations from a single State.
- In States where there are disputes concerning the appropriate governing body [Jammu & Kashmir, Bihar, Rajasthan, etc.], it is best left to the BCCI or the Court (as may be the case) to decide which association would represent the State.
- The Committee recommends members which do not represent a particular State they be accorded the status of Associate Member so that their views may still be considered while they will not have voting rights.
- The categories of Affiliate and Future Members should be removed, and only Full Members and Associate Members should remain, the former with voting rights and the latter without.
- Governance related problems
Concentration of power
Board president enjoys the veto power, from overall superintendence of the Board and its affairs to taking action against players and even approving the composition of the team chosen by the Selectors.
Lack of competence
present Working Committee of the BCCI consisting of the various office bearers elected by the BCCI and other representatives of the Members do not have any managerial expertise and requisite experience to run BCCI in a professional manner.
There seems to be no rational basis for the Presidency to be rotated as per Zones, which has the effect of forsaking merit. A person who has the support of as few as two or three members in his Zone may end up as the President, if it is the turn of that Zone for election of President.
No representation to players
It is very rare that players are elected to the Working Committee of the BCCI. they have no say in the affairs of the very body towards which they are the primary contributors.
Unlimited terms and tenures
Many individuals occupy various posts in the BCCI for multiple terms and on multiple occasions, without any ceiling limit.
There appears to be no ground on which an office bearer has to demit office.
- Governance of the BCCI must be decentralised. All crucial powers and functions bestowed exclusively on the President will have to be divided across the governing body, which is to be known as the Apex Council.
- Bringing in professional managers and area experts.
- President should be elected from among the Full Members, so that the best and most competent person is selected.
- Provision for five Vice-Presidents is detrimental to efficiency and efficacy so only one Vice-President shall be elected to the Apex Council.
- Apex council shall be a nine member body: The five elected Office Bearers of BCCI (President, Vice President, Secretary, Joint Secretary and Treasurer) shall be the members of the Apex Council. In addition, the Apex Council shall have four other ‘Councillors’ – two (one male, one female) to be nominated by the Players’ Association which is to be formed, one to be elected by the Full Members of BCCI from amongst themselves and one to be nominated by the Comptroller & Auditor General of India.
Other important recommendation
- Committee has recommended that the legislature must seriously consider bringing BCCI within the purview of the RTI Act.
Recommendations accepted by Supreme Court
- Recommendation of a tenure and age limit for Board and State association members.
- The tenure limit is a maximum of three terms of three years each, to be served non-consecutively, and with a mandatory cooling-off period after each term
- The age limit has been capped at 70.
- SC accepted the bitterly opposed ‘one State, one vote’ recommendation.
- Geographically undefined associations such as the Railways will also no longer be full members.
- Court accepted the exclusion of ministers and active bureaucrats from holding positions in State associations or the Board.
- It also accepted the restructuring of the BCCI’s management committee replacing it with a nine-member apex committee.
- The president’s power has been curtailed, with voting rights curbed.
Recommendations that SC has kept out of its purview:-
- SC has accepted Parliamentary role in determining whether or not the Board should come within the folds of RTI, and also in deciding whether to legalise sports betting or not.
- SC has also refrained from curtailing the Board’s ability to monetise and earn revenue.
- BCCI has been given six months to implement all the changes
BCCI has been given six months to implement all the changes.