Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
sidmis

BCCI not covered by RTI law

Recommended Posts

sidmis

BCCI not covered by RTI law

Press Trust of India

Friday, January 25, 2008 7:42 PM (New Delhi)

Reported by NDTV.com: BCCI not covered by RTI law

 

The country's apex cricket governing body BCCI could not be made accountable to provide information to citizens under the Right to Information law, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has held.

In a recent order, the CIC rejected a citizen's plea to seek from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) certain information about its affairs.

 

Nagpur-based Anil Chintaman Khare in his RTI application had submitted that BCCI was registered under the Societies Registration Act and should be termed a "public authority" for the purposes of making it accountable under the transparency law.

 

The BCCI, however, contested the applicant's claim stating that despite being registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, it was not constituted under the Constitution or any law made by the Parliament or any state legislature.

 

Concurring with BCCI's stand, Information Commissioner Padma Balasubramanian said: "Registration under an Act is different from being established under it. Merely because BCCI is registered under the Societies Registration Act, does not bring it under the purview of RTI Act."

 

In its arguments before the Commission, the BCCI had contended that it did not receive any funds, directly or indirectly, from the Centre and also did not have on its board any nominee from any government.

 

The applicant said BCCI received a lot of tax benefits from the government and hence should be made answerable to the people of the country.

 

The Commission came to its decision after finding that BCCI did not fall under any of the categories required to bring any public office under the RTI Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
meteor

Dear sidmis,

 

CIC's ruling is quite unfortunate. BCCI, whatever may be its status, represents India in the field of cricket. Huge money is involved which is public money, in some way or other. So, it should be transparent.

 

- meteor:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sidmis

Hello Meteor,

I fully agree with you. This decision of the commission has a a lot of other consequences. BCCI should not have been left scot free like this.

 

Once the decision comes, lets see what's the logic behind this decision.

 

Sidmis

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sidmis

DECISION:

To bring any entity as a public authority within the ambit of the RTI Act, it has to satisfy at least one of the requirements of Section 2(f). In the present case, BCCI, as explained in its comments, does not fall under any of the categories stipulated in Section 2(f).

 

Registration under an Act is different from being established under an Act.

Therefore, merely because BCCI is registered under the Societies Registration Act, does not bring BCCI under the purview of the RTI Act. Accordingly, since BCCI is not a public authority in terms of Section 2(f) of the Act, no direction can be given to the BCCI to furnish the information to the appellant and accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

 

I wonder why the complainant went all the way to the CIC, he could have

complained to the Tamilnadu Information Commission, since the Board is

registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.

 

Here's the Full Version of the Decision ...

 

SidMis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Satish Gupta

The spirit of RTI extends well beyond the express categories mentioned in the Act. Any body/agency that derives substantial part of its revenue or power from the government is covered by RTI.

 

Can anyone send a cricket team to represent India against Australia? If not, why not? If anyone can send a team, then BCCI should be treated as a private organization. However if BCCI is authorized by some agreement between BCCI and government, giving BCCI exclusive power to represent India, then BCCI must be transparent in its operations. It should be covered under RTI. The agreement does not have to be in writing. If the actions of the government are such, that it grants exclusive powers to BCCI then it should satisfy the requirement.

 

There is provision in CIC regulations to appeal to the chief commissioner if someone is not satisfied with the ruling of one commissioner. This might be one such occasion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ganpat1956

Can anyone send a cricket team to represent India against Australia? If not, why not? If anyone can send a team, then BCCI should be treated as a private organization. However if BCCI is authorized by some agreement between BCCI and government, giving BCCI exclusive power to represent India, then BCCI must be transparent in its operations. It should be covered under RTI. The agreement does not have to be in writing. If the actions of the government are such, that it grants exclusive powers to BCCI then it should satisfy the requirement.

 

An excellent point of view to marshall the arguments and sustain the case further. I hope the persons concerned take due note of this and prefer their appeal before the full bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Other points to be considered:

 

1. State associations affiliated to BCCI use State land for building Stadiums at subsidised prices.

2. Matches in India are held in these stadiums.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wagh7

Sirs,

 

I agree with the comments and views of all above posts.

 

I strongly feel that BCCI should come under RTI Act.

 

Because when Large public Intrest is there RTI act allowing even every personl information to disclose under RTI Act.

 

When personl information of a single person is comming under RTI Act, How so big Organization BCCI does not come under RTI Act?

 

BCCI is representing India in all world cricket. Huge public money is involved, the chief's of BCCI are very noted and having very much social responsibility.

 

As Karira noted that these Associations using Govt. Land for play, practice and administrative purposes, for conducting matches using Govt. Stadiums through out the country.

 

Hence I strongly give my openion that BCCI should be brought under the perview of RTI Act.

 

rakatkam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wagh7

dear friends,

 

I think, before giving such decision, CIC should advocate in favour of applicant and such decisions should be revived.

 

ra katkam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pma1212

Talking about the BCCI let's accept that it is not accountable to Govt. of India and to the people of india . In such a case, why should not the goverment consider recovering the cost of security and facilities provided during the matches and to the visiting and home teams. why should they be granted stadia at token lease, why not at commercial rate, why should they be allowed to burn flood lights, when India is running short of electricity. let them arrange for their security arrangemnets, their stadia and their electricity and then let's see if they can boast to be the richest board!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wagh7

Dear sirs,

 

We have to strongly advocate and fight for the total taking over of BCCI by Govt. of India.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ganpat1956

Rakatkam,

May I remind you--this place is not for advocating any campaign or movement or fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sidmis

Big Picture - Get BCCI under RTI too

 

03_04_2010_023_003_004.jpg

AS reported by Shri PRADEEP MAGAZINE, in Hindustan Times, April 03 2010 ,Page 23

 

FAIR DEAL Clarity required in sports bodies including cricket THE BCCI, WHICH FOR REASONS BEYOND COMPREHENSION, SHIELDS ITSELF BEHIND THE ARGUMENT THAT IT IS A PRIVATE BODY AND CANNOT BE QUESTIONED BY THE STATE.

 

Amidst the euphoria of the IPL competing strongly with the weepy prime time serials, the hysterical media has almost ignored a very significant move towards forcing our sports fed- erations to become accountable and transparent in their func- tioning, especially in matters financial.

 

Sports Minister MS Gill needs to be complimented for bringing all the federations into the ambit of the Right To Information (RTI) Act, which in turn means the public will now have the right to know how and where the money given to them by the government (tax payer) goes.

 

Is the money being spent for the purpose it is meant for or does most of it get siphoned off, as is alleged by many?

 

However, the sports body which generates enormous revenues and profits that could be the envy of any rich corporate body, unfortunately, does not fall under the gambit of this Act.

 

The reason for the exepm- tion presumably being it is a private body which does not take a single pie from the gov- ernment and hence cannot come under government or public scrutiny.

 

This is a false presumption, if one goes by the 2004 High Court ruling in the PIL filed against the Board by Rahul Mehra, a lawyer by profession, but an inveterate sports fan by nature. By admitting the PIL, the Court had in its judgment clearly said that the BCCI may be a private body, but it per- forms a public function and therefore comes under Article 226 of the Constitution (public scrutiny).

 

The BCCI, which for reasons beyond comprehension, is loathe to subject itself to pub- lic scrutiny (unless it has some- thing to hide) shields itself behind the argument that it is a private body and cannot be questioned by the state.

 

BCCI conveniently forgets that not only does it get tax ben- efits, it also gets other largesse from the state, like stadias at throwaway rates and, most importantly, is allowed to use the name India for the team which represents it. It gets these concessions because it is deemed a charitable organisation which performs a public function.

 

Ever since the economic lib- eralisation in the nineties coin- cided with private television channels being allowed to enter the Indian market, the BCCI has been getting richer by the day.

 

Without doubt this has had a huge positive effect on the game with greater funding at the grass root level and the play- ers themselves reaping the enormous benefits of the eco- nomic boom, fuelled by the mul- tiplying popularity of the game in the country.

 

Post IPL, the money which the Board is handling has gone into billions of dollars and, as the custodian of the game whose main stakeholders are its fans, shouldn't it be mandatory for them to come under greater public scrutiny?

 

By their own admission, all the members of the board and its office-bearers are performing an honorary job and take no salaries for services they render.

 

The Indian public should salute them for this selfless atti- tude, which presumably stems from their great “love“ for the game. If that be the case then what stops them from willingly coming under the RTI Act, even if the government for some legal reasons is “unable“ to do so.

 

They should remember that the money, which is coming into their coffers is because of the millions of die-hard fans who support the game and spend their money, time and energy in cheering their team and their players.

 

The reason fans support the Board is because they believe it is “building“ India and not “selling“ brand India to the highest bidder. That is why it is impor- tant that the Board's accounts should come under public scrutiny.

 

HindustanTimes ePaper - Article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Atul Patankar

As reported at hindustantimes.com on April 2, 2010

Amidst the euphoria of the IPL competing strongly with the weepy prime time serials, the hysterical media has almost ignored a very significant move towards forcing our sports federations to become accountable and transparent in their functioning, especially in matters financial.

Sports Minister MS Gill needs to be complimented for bringing all the federations into the ambit of the Right To Information (RTI) Act, which in turn means the public will now have the right to know how and where the money given to them by the government (tax-payer) goes.

Is the money being spent for the purpose it is meant for or does most of it get siphoned off, as is alleged by many?

However, the sports body which generates enormous revenues and profits that could be the envy of any rich corporate body, unfortunately, does not fall under the gambit of this Act.

The reason for the exepmtion presumably being it is a private body which does not take a single pie from the government and hence cannot come under government or public scrutiny.

This is a false presumption, if one goes by the 2004 High Court ruling in the PIL filed against the Board by Rahul Mehra, a lawyer by profession, but an inveterate sports fan by nature. By admitting the PIL, the Court had in its judgment clearly said that the BCCI may be a private body, but it performs a public function and therefore comes under Article 226 of the Constitution (public scrutiny).

The BCCI, which for reasons beyond comprehension, is loathe to subject itself to public scrutiny (unless it has something to hide) shields itself behind the argument that it is a private body and cannot be questioned by the state.

BCCI conveniently forgets that not only does it get tax benefits, it also gets other largesse from the state, like stadias at throwaway rates and, most importantly, is allowed to use the name India for the team which represents it. It gets these concessions because it is deemed a charitable organisation which performs a public function.

Ever since the economic liberalisation in the nineties coincided with private television channels being allowed to enter the Indian market, the BCCI has been getting richer by the day.

Without doubt this has had a huge positive effect on the game with greater funding at the grass root level and the players themselves reaping the enormous benefits of the economic boom, fuelled by the multiplying popularity of the game in the country.

Post IPL, the money which the Board is handling has gone into billions of dollars and, as the custodian of the game whose main stakeholders are its fans, shouldn’t it be mandatory for them to come under greater public scrutiny?

By their own admission, all the members of the board and its office-bearers are performing an honorary job and take no salaries for services they render.

The Indian public should salute them for this selfless attitude, which presumably stems from their great “love” for the game. If that be the case then what stops them from willingly coming under the RTI Act, even if the government for some legal reasons is “unable” to do so.

They should remember that the money, which is coming into their coffers is because of the millions of die-hard fans who support the game and spend their money, time and energy in cheering their team and their players.

The reason fans support the Board is because they believe it is “building” India and not “selling” brand India to the highest bidder. That is why it is important that the Board’s accounts should come under public scrutiny.

 

Source: Get BCCI under RTI too- Hindustan Times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by Swati Chaturvedi in cricket.zeenews.com on 13 April 2011:

http://cricket.zeenews.com/fullstory.aspx?nid=37644

 

BCCI a public body: Sports Ministry

 

New Delhi: In a huge set-back to Sharad Pawar and other political heavy-weights such as BJP`s Arun Jaitley, the Union Sports Ministry has recognized the Board of Cricket Control (BCCI) as a public authority.

 

The BCCI had earlier gone to court on several occasions to claim that it was a private body/trust to claim several exemptions including huge tax benefits.

 

 

Interestingly, in its battle with the Union government, the BCCI was represented by Union Minister Kapil Sibal`s son.

 

Now Ajay Maken has taken a clear stand in view of a RTI petition filed and ordered the BCCI to answer the queries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 13 April 2011:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/Is-BCCI-answerable-under-the-RTI-Act/articleshow/7972537.cms

 

Is BCCI answerable under the RTI Act?

 

NEW DELHI: It seems the Sports Ministry now considers Board of Control for Cricket in India answerable under the Right to Information Act as it has transferred such an application to the cricket body.

 

The Central Information Commission in number of recent decisions on sports federations had declared them to be public authority covered under the RTI Act, but in 2008 Information Commissioner Padma Balasubramanian had exempted BCCI from the ambit of transparency law through her order.

 

The latest order of the Sports Ministry, however, cites the October 26, 2010 decision of the Kerala High Court which declared officials of Kerala Cricket Association as public servants. The appeal against the High Court order was dismissed by the Supreme Court this year.

 

"The High Court of Kerala in a case related to State Cricket Association, has ruled that the Federations are required to perform public duties by virtue of holding their offices and hence, are public servants.

 

"The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with the ruling of the High Court," Joint Secretary Injeti Srinivas at the Ministry said in a reply to an RTI application seeking to know whether Supreme Court has held BCCI officials as public-servants.

 

Responding to the application, Srinivas who is the Appellate Authority at the Ministry "directed" the Public Information officer "to transfer the application to BCCI for response to the specific queries pertaining to them."

 

Activist Subhash Agrawal had sought to know from the Sports Ministry nature of assistance received by the BCCI from it, constitution of BCCI and its affiliated state-bodies, outline of BCCI budget for last two years, details of pending allegations of corruption etc against officials of BCCI.

 

He had also demanded information on money paid separately to each of players, coaches, selectors and members of board of BCCI in last two years, assets and awards given players, coaches and others by BCCI.

 

In addition, Agrawal also asked if BCCI had ever given some grant or loan to Constitution Club, New Delhi besides amount, date and purpose of such funds among other details of such financial help.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sanjaye

Recently i read that 45 crore Rs.tax excemption was given to the BCCI by the Govt for 26 days of ICC world cup for the team which neither Indian team nor it played for India. I learned that it was the recommendation of "Central financial advisory committee".

I wanted to sue the governement for offering cash award and free land/flats and tax exemption for these players. Worse is the IOC named them for "Khel ratna" "arjuna" and "Dronacharya".

Whom should i approach.. and how i can proceed.

 

P Anantha Raj,

Indian Coast Guard

C/o Fleet Mail Office

Mumbai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by PTI in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 20 June 2011:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/more-sports/others/NSFs-including-BCCI-to-come-under-RTI-Maken/articleshow/8928857.cms

 

NSFs, including BCCI to come under RTI: Maken

 

BANGALORE: The National Sports Federations, including the BCCI, would be treated as public authority and would come under the Right to Information Act ( RTI) under the proposed National Sports Development bill, sports minister Ajay Maken said on Monday.

 

Maken once again clarified that the aim of the proposed bill is to make the NSFs more accountable and bring in transparency, particularly in financial functioning and administrative matters.

 

"Sports bodies are repositories of public trust and they have to be accountable to public at large," Maken said.

 

Retired Justice Mukul Mudgal, chairman of the committee that examined the bill, had submitted the report to the government last Saturday and Maken said, "It's a first of its kind bill."

 

Noting that earlier there were only policies, norms and regulations, the minister insisted that only with legislation can the sports federations be reformed.

 

Maken also said he would like to make changes in the proposed legislation to make the government "less obtrusive" in the functioning of the sports federations, their recognition and registration.

 

"The government role would be bare minimal," he insisted. Maken, who earlier inaugurated a newly constructed shooting range complex and elite men's hostel at Sports Authority of India's (SAI) Netaji Subhas Southern Centre, said SAI would be made equally accountable as the NSFs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Atul Patankar

As reported attimesofindia.indiatimes.com on Aug 23, 2011

 

 

CIC may reconsider exemption of BCCI from RTI Act

PTI | Aug 23, 2011, 05.23PM IST

NEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission may reconsider its previous decision of exempting the Indian cricket board from the ambit of the RTI Act as it on Tuesday indicated that a larger bench may be constituted to decide on the "complex" issue of bringing BCCI under the transparency law.

 

The CIC in a previous order has declared that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not a public authority covered under the RTI Act.

 

However, Information Commissioner ML Sharma during a hearing on Tuesday said since it is a "complex" matter, if need arises, a larger bench may be considered for a decision.

 

The case relates to RTI applications filed by activist SC Agrawal and one Alok Varshney seeking details of working of the BCCI. In its reply, the cricket body said it does not come under the ambit of RTI Act as it is not financed by the government.

 

It also cited a Supreme Court order which said BCCI was not a "state" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and said even the CIC has exempted it from the RTI Act.

 

Challenging the arguments, counsel for petitioners Rahul Mehra said he can prove that the board received indirect funding from the government in terms of the subsidies and facilities such as stadia, a fact refuted by the BCCI counsel.

 

Sharma asked Mehra to present written submissions before the Commission in favour of his argument that BCCI is a public authority within the ambit of the RTI Act in three weeks.

 

He said BCCI will be then be asked to give its reply on the submissions and then he would decide if this can be referred to a larger bench of the panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by PTI in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 23 August 2011:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/CIC-may-reconsider-exemption-of-BCCI-from-RTI-Act/articleshow/9708384.cms

 

CIC may reconsider exemption of BCCI from RTI Act

 

NEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission may reconsider its previous decision of exempting the Indian cricket board from the ambit of the RTI Act as it on Tuesday indicated that a larger bench may be constituted to decide on the "complex" issue of bringing BCCI under the transparency law.

 

The CIC in a previous order has declared that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not a public authority covered under the RTI Act.

 

However, Information Commissioner ML Sharma during a hearing on Tuesday said since it is a "complex" matter, if need arises, a larger bench may be considered for a decision.

 

The case relates to RTI applications filed by activist SC Agrawal and one Alok Varshney seeking details of working of the BCCI. In its reply, the cricket body said it does not come under the ambit of RTI Act as it is not financed by the government.

 

It also cited a Supreme Court order which said BCCI was not a "state" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and said even the CIC has exempted it from the RTI Act.

 

Challenging the arguments, counsel for petitioners Rahul Mehra said he can prove that the board received indirect funding from the government in terms of the subsidies and facilities such as stadia, a fact refuted by the BCCI counsel.

 

Sharma asked Mehra to present written submissions before the Commission in favour of his argument that BCCI is a public authority within the ambit of the RTI Act in three weeks.

 

He said BCCI will be then be asked to give its reply on the submissions and then he would decide if this can be referred to a larger bench of the panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sajib Nandi

BCCI under RT Act? Ball in Cabinet's court

 

As reported by timesofindia.indiatimes.com on August 30, 2011:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/BCCI-under-RTI-Act-Ball-in-Cabinets-court/articleshow/9788663.cms

 

NEW DELHI: In its bid to bring the cricket board (BCCI) under the umbrella of the national sports federations (NSFs) and ensure transparency in the functioning of all sports bodies, the sports ministry on Tuesday would be seeking the Cabinet's nod for the introduction of the National Sports (Development) Bill 2011 in the current session of the Parliament.

 

The Bill, which was prepared after receiving comments and suggestions from various stakeholders and the public, seeks to have BCCI as an NSF and wants it to function as a "public authority" and "comply with the requirements specified in the Right to Information Act".

 

If BCCI becomes an NSF, it would be bound to provide information under the RTI and would also be forced to follow the anti-doping rules as specified by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

 

These proposals of the Bill have been vehemently opposed by the BCCI and some sports bodies, including the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), which want to continue functioning in an autonomous manner, free from public scrutiny and accountability.

 

The Bill, aimed at creating and enabling legal framework for healthy development of sports, also calls for more transparency in the system by suggesting measures for the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) as well as the NSFs on several matters, including finance. According to the Bill, the IOA will have to submit a detailed report to the Centre every year which would be laid before both houses of the Parliament.

 

The report would include audited financial statements as well as measures taken to promote athletes' welfare, to fight against doping, to promote sports for all and for effective, expeditious and time-bound redressal of grievances mechanism.

 

According to it, every office bearer of NSFs and the IOA shall retire on attaining the age of seventy years. The president of these bodies will not be eligible to re-contest for the similar post on completion of 12 years or three terms in office of four years each, with or without break. The other office-bearers cannot continue for more than two consecutive terms, but can be eligible for reelection after a cooling-off period of four years.

 

The Bill also calls for the appointment of an Ombudsman to mediate or conciliate disputes concerning athletes as well as complaints or disputes in the functioning and management of the IOA or any NSF. It also calls for establishment of a sports dispute and appellate sports tribunal to adjudicate any dispute amongst office-bearers or members of the IOA, between IOA and NSFs, between NSFs and so on.

 

Once formed, the proposal says, all civil cases in which the NSFs or the IOA are a party and pending for adjudication of dispute before any court or authority (other than High Court and Supreme Court) would be transferred to the tribunal, whose chairman and members would be selected by a committee headed by the Chief Justice of India or his nominee. The selection committee will have the cabinet secretary and secretaries of three ministries as its members. Similar cases pending in High Court could be transferred to the tribunal with the leave of a High Court.

 

 

 

Gamechanger: Government move to control BCCI

 

As reported by www.hindustantimes.com on August 30, 2011:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Gamechanger-Government--move--to--control--BCCI/Article1-739471.aspx

 

In a move that would empower the government to set the ground rules for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), a draft bill is expected to be considered by the cabinet on Tuesday. The draft introduces a regulatory regime on all national sports federations, including the BCCI.

 

The cricket board is among the few sports federations that does not receive funds from the government but has been under attack for lack of transparency and accountability in its functioning, especially after the Indian team’s debacle in England.

 

A parliamentary standing committee had recently pulled up the BCCI top brass for the way the Indian Premier League (IPL) was being run.

 

The board did not respond to queries from HT.

 

To make the BCCI accountable like any other sports federation, the government aims to bring it under the Right To Information (RTI) Act and make its audited accounts available on its website on an annual basis through the National Sports Development Bill, 2011.

 

The ministers of home, finance and law have supported the bill in inter-ministerial consultations.

 

It will now have to be approved by the Cabinet - which includes former BCCI and current International Cricket Council (ICC) chief and agriculture minister Sharad Pawar.

 

The bill reserves at least 25% posts in federations for former players, which means that ex-cricketers will get more play in the affairs of the BCCI, at the expense of politicians.

 

It also puts a 70-year age bar for all administrators and limits appointments to only two consecutive terms.

Around 44 sports federations except BCCI and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) have agreed to accept the age bar and other terms of appointment.

 

Spelling more trouble for the cricket board and Team India, the bill makes the National Anti-Doping Agency the sole body to implement all anti-doping measures and wants all federations to abide by its regulations. Team India has opposed moves to cover them under the anti-doping measures.

 

The government believes that the BCCI will have to accept the regulations as the bill provides for mandatory fresh registration of all national sports bodies within a year of enactment of the law.

 

The proposed law provides for an independent National Sports Council for framing policies and a National Sports Ombudsman to be set up in consultation with the IOA to look into all sorts of complaints. Besides, all disputes will have to be settled by a new sports tribunal once the bill is enacted into law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 30 August 2011:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/9793848.cms

 

BCCI rejects government's move to come under RTI

 

NEW DELHI: The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) on Tuesday has rejected the sports ministry move to bring the cricket board under the RTI.

 

The cricket board's vice president Rajeev Shukla said that the BCCI is not keen on the move of coming under the RTI and also refused to comment on the specifics of the new sports bill.

 

Shukla added that the organisations that take government grants should come under the act and not the BCCI.

 

However, top government sources say its an act to control cricket in India.

 

The new sports bill, which was prepared after receiving comments and suggestions from various stakeholders and the public, seeks to have BCCI as national sports federation (NSF) and wants it to function as a "public authority" and "comply with the requirements specified in the Right to Information Act".

 

If BCCI becomes an NSF, it would be bound to provide information under the RTI and would also be forced to follow the anti-doping rules as specified by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

 

These proposals of the Bill have been vehemently opposed by the BCCI and some sports bodies, including the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), which want to continue functioning in an autonomous manner, free from public scrutiny and accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Atul Patankar

As reported at ibnlive.in.com on Aug 31, 2011

 

New Delhi: Sports Minister Ajay Maken on Wednesday directly attacked the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) for refusing to come under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Maken said that the board gets tax exemptions and land and therefore they should be accountable to the people.

 

Ajay Maken lashed out at the BCCI, a day after his Sports Bill aiming to bring sports bodies under RTI was sent back to the drawing board by the Cabinet.

 

Maken pointed out that the BCCI was in fact getting governmen funds indirectly in terms of tax exemptions and land facilities so they should come under RTI purview.

 

"what do they mean by they don't get govt funds so shouldn't come under RTI? They are indrectly getting government funds," he said.

 

He raised the question of how much the BCCI has to pay for using grounds like Ferozeshah Kotla.

"How about the tax exemptions? How about the land they get? How much did they pay for the ferozshah kotla?" he said.

 

Maken underlined that he was not asking sports bodies to reveal anything to the government, rather he wanted them to be accountable to the people.

 

"We are not asking them to reveal anything to the government. We are asking them to be accountable to the people," he said.

 

With regard to age limit, Ajay Maken said the sporting bodies should follow the example of the judiciary.

 

"What is their problem with age limit? Doesn't the judiciary the bureacracy have age limits. Why can't a good example be followed? If someone remains a federatio chief for ever why will vested interests not develop," he said.

 

On Tuesday, the Sports Bill was sent for reconsideration after powerful Ministers in the union Cabinet rejected many of its provisions. Those disagreeing with the bill as it stands also head sports federations.

 

There was no unanimity within Cabinet on whether cricket as a sport should be brought under RTI. Objections were also raised against restrictions imposed on maximum terms for President of sports federations. Several ministers also found long term development goals of the Bill to be too intrusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DineshK

View this video

 

Listen to what sports minister Mr Ajay Makan has to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rawish

Bcci should comes under RTI Act.smartly BCCI using country name,Bcci puts Indian image on stakes...how come they uses NGO banner ,cricket should comes under sports ministry technically,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      I had sought details of loan and copies of agreement entered with World Bank, JICA etc. of IT Expressway Chennai (created in partnership with Govt of TN) However the PIO has replied that they have moved out of world bank loan and taken loan from other banks details of which cannot be disclosed under 8(1) d of RTI Act citing "commercial confidence".
      However the IT Expressway is a public limited company having entered into agreement with Govt of TN and others for developing and maintaining a particular stretch of road.
       
      Kindly help me frame a good first appeal.
       
      Sent from my SM-J510FN using RTI INDIA mobile app
       
       
       
    • shrivar1212
      By shrivar1212
      Hello,
      I require help on co-operative issue. I had filed the RTI with the PIO, Dy registrar of co-op societies seeking information on affairs of society.
      The PIO has replied stating that the information I am seeking is available with co-operative society. My query is:
      1] Can PIO direct an applicant to private body for information?
      2] The society in question comes under the jurisdiction of the PIO, since PIO is public authority and co-operative society a private body, is it not duty of PIO to seek information from society and give it to me? How can PIO direct me back to society? This is RTI application, either I have to appeal or I have to forego. I cannot complaint against reply. So I want to approach FAA, under what grounds can I?
      3] What kind of violation PIO has committed by directing me back to private society? 
      4] Does co-operative society come under the purview of RTI ACt?
      Your views are appreciated. I am fighting lone battle with corrupt system. 
       

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy