indian cricket

End of a saga? SC sets aside key Lodha panel recommendations, approves draft BCCI constitution

The controversial one-state-one-vote rule has been rescinded and there won’t be a cooling off period till two consecutive terms.

The Board of Control for Control for Cricket in India can breathe a bit easier after the Supreme Court on Thursday decided to set aside some of the controversial recommendations of the Justice Lodha committee.

The newly approved draft constitution effectively dilutes the court’s earlier order on a tenure cap for office bearers and reinstating voting rights of four legacy cricket associations. In a string of rulings in the long-running case involving the Board of Control for Cricket in India, the apex court, however, warned state associations that they face action if they don’t adopt the new constitution in the next 30 days.

The controversial one-state-one-vote rule has been rescinded and there won’t be a cooling off period till two consecutive terms. Subsequently, the Supreme Court has given full membership status to the Mumbai Cricket Association, Saurashtra, Vidarbha Cricket Association, Railways, Services and Varsities Association.

Earlier, the BCCI had announced that 12 out of its 37 state units (including North Eastern States) had submitted a common four-point suggestion to amicus curiae Gopal Subramanium with regard to amending the Lodha recommendations.

The four points that the affiliated units showed resistance to was the implementation of the one-state-one-vote policy, the cooling-off period (after every three years), the constitution of the apex council, and the distribution of power and functions between elected representatives and professionals.

The three-member Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Deepak Misra had instructed all the affiliated units of BCCI to file their suggestions with regards to clauses which they are finding practically difficult to implement.

Relief for BCCI

While some associations have promised to adopt the charter – written in compliance with the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha Committee – most continue to oppose it on the grounds that it puts a cap on the age and tenure of office bearers.

The ruling, especially on the “cooling-off” norm as well as “one-state, one vote”, comes as a relief to BCCI, which has questioned the feasibility of the Lodha recommendations.

The committee had recommended a cooling off period after just one tenure, instead of two. It had also recommended the “one-state, one-vote” policy, due to which some city and regional cricket associations like Mumbai and Saurashtra had lost their place in BCCI, which was allowed to give membership only to state associations.

The Supreme Court, in its July 18, 2016 verdict, accepted most of the recommendations of the Lodha committee,which was formed in January 2015 under retired Justice R M Lodha’s charge with the aim to reform the BCCI following charges of large-scale maladministration.

Thursday’s ruling, however, waters down key recommendations of the panel.

In approving the draft constitution, Misra also asked the registrar general of Tamil Nadu Societies to bring on record the approved BCCI constitution within four weeks. The BCCI’s constitution is registered in Tamil Nadu.

The bench – also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud – restored permanent membership to Railways, Services and Universities, which are not full cricket associations but are “boards”.

On July 5, the apex court had restrained all state cricket bodies from holding elections till it pronounced the verdict on finalisation of the draft constitution of the BCCI.

Background

The Lodha panel had recommended a slew of structural reforms in BCCI which were approved by the apex court. The court had approved these recommendations, including ‘one state, one vote’, ‘one member, one post’ and fixing an age cap of 70 years on those occupying BCCI posts.

In the earlier hearing, the counsel for Tamil Nadu Cricket Association (TNCA) had opposed the cooling-off period for the office bearers suggested by the Lodha panel, and said there should be continuity of experience. The TNCA had also objected to the age cap of 70 years for office bearers as suggested by the panel.

The top court had earlier asked state cricket associations and BCCI office-bearers to give suggestions on the draft constitution for the apex cricket body to the amicus, saying these have to be in tune with the Lodha panel recommendations and its verdict.

The Lodha panel was formed in the wake of the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee report that called for reforms in the BCCI. The Mudgal panel had gone into the state of affairs of the BCCI, following the 2013 IPL betting and spot-fixing controversy.

COA welcomes move

Committee of Administrators chief Vinod Rai welcomed the Supreme Court order on mandatory cooling off period for BCCI office-bearers after two consecutive terms and for putting a roadmap in place for the Board’s elections.

‘’This is an excellent order. I have absolutely no problem with office-bearers having two consecutive terms. Even I had originally wanted a six year term before cooling off period but couldn’t get consensus,’’ Rai told PTI on what is being seen as the most significant aspect of the order.

Read more from Vinod Rai here.

(With PTI inputs)

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Swara Bhasker: Sharp objects has to be on the radar of every woman who is tired of being “nice”

The actress weighs in on what she loves about the show.

This article has been written by award-winning actor Swara Bhasker.

All women growing up in India, South Asia, or anywhere in the world frankly; will remember in some form or the other that gentle girlhood admonishing, “Nice girls don’t do that.” I kept recalling that gently reasoned reproach as I watched Sharp Objects (you can catch it on Hotstar Premium). Adapted from the author of Gone Girl, Gillian Flynn’s debut novel Sharp Objects has been directed by Jean-Marc Vallée, who has my heart since he gave us Big Little Lies. It stars the multiple-Oscar nominee Amy Adams, who delivers a searing performance as Camille Preaker; and Patricia Clarkson, who is magnetic as the dominating and dark Adora Crellin. As an actress myself, it felt great to watch a show driven by its female performers.

The series is woven around a troubled, alcohol-dependent, self-harming, female journalist Camille (single and in her thirties incidentally) who returns to the small town of her birth and childhood, Wind Gap, Missouri, to report on two similarly gruesome murders of teenage girls. While the series is a murder mystery, it equally delves into the psychology, not just of the principal characters, but also of the town, and thus a culture as a whole.

There is a lot that impresses in Sharp Objects — the manner in which the storytelling gently unwraps a plot that is dark, disturbing and shocking, the stellar and crafty control that Jean-Marc Vallée exercises on his narrative, the cinematography that is fluid and still manages to suggest that something sinister lurks within Wind Gap, the editing which keeps this narrative languid yet sharp and consistently evokes a haunting sensation.

Sharp Objects is also liberating (apart from its positive performance on Bechdel parameters) as content — for female actors and for audiences in giving us female centric and female driven shows that do not bear the burden of providing either role-models or even uplifting messages. 

Instead, it presents a world where women are dangerous and dysfunctional but very real — a world where women are neither pure victims, nor pure aggressors. A world where they occupy the grey areas, complex and contradictory as agents in a power play, in which they control some reigns too.

But to me personally, and perhaps to many young women viewers across the world, what makes Sharp Objects particularly impactful, perhaps almost poignant, is the manner in which it unravels the whole idea, the culture, the entire psychology of that childhood admonishment “Nice girls don’t do that.” Sharp Objects explores the sinister and dark possibilities of what the corollary of that thinking could be.

“Nice girls don’t do that.”

“Who does?”

“Bad girls.”

“So I’m a bad girl.”

“You shouldn’t be a bad girl.”

“Why not?”

“Bad girls get in trouble.”

“What trouble? What happens to bad girls?”

“Bad things.”

“What bad things?”

“Very bad things.”

“How bad?”

“Terrible!!!”

“Like what?”

“Like….”

A point the show makes early on is that both the victims of the introductory brutal murders were not your typically nice girly-girls. Camille, the traumatised protagonist carrying a burden from her past was herself not a nice girl. Amma, her deceptive half-sister manipulates the nice girl act to defy her controlling mother. But perhaps the most incisive critique on the whole ‘Be a nice girl’ culture, in fact the whole ‘nice’ culture — nice folks, nice manners, nice homes, nice towns — comes in the form of Adora’s character and the manner in which beneath the whole veneer of nice, a whole town is complicit in damning secrets and not-so-nice acts. At one point early on in the show, Adora tells her firstborn Camille, with whom she has a strained relationship (to put it mildly), “I just want things to be nice with us but maybe I don’t know how..” Interestingly it is this very notion of ‘nice’ that becomes the most oppressive and deceptive experience of young Camille, and later Amma’s growing years.

This ‘Culture of Nice’ is in fact the pervasive ‘Culture of Silence’ that women all over the world, particularly in India, are all too familiar with. 

It takes different forms, but always towards the same goal — to silence the not-so-nice details of what the experiences; sometimes intimate experiences of women might be. This Culture of Silence is propagated from the child’s earliest experience of being parented by society in general. Amongst the values that girls receive in our early years — apart from those of being obedient, dutiful, respectful, homely — we also receive the twin headed Chimera in the form of shame and guilt.

“Have some shame!”

“Oh for shame!”

“Shameless!”

“Shameful!”

“Ashamed.”

“Do not bring shame upon…”

Different phrases in different languages, but always with the same implication. Shameful things happen to girls who are not nice and that brings ‘shame’ on the family or everyone associated with the girl. And nice folks do not talk about these things. Nice folks go on as if nothing has happened.

It is this culture of silence that women across the world today, are calling out in many different ways. Whether it is the #MeToo movement or a show like Sharp Objects; or on a lighter and happier note, even a film like Veere Di Wedding punctures this culture of silence, quite simply by refusing to be silenced and saying the not-nice things, or depicting the so called ‘unspeakable’ things that could happen to girls. By talking about the unspeakable, you rob it of the power to shame you; you disallow the ‘Culture of Nice’ to erase your experience. You stand up for yourself and you build your own identity.

And this to me is the most liberating aspect of being an actor, and even just a girl at a time when shows like Sharp Objects and Big Little Lies (another great show on Hotstar Premium), and films like Veere Di Wedding and Anaarkali Of Aarah are being made.

The next time I hear someone say, “Nice girls don’t do that!”, I know what I’m going to say — I don’t give a shit about nice. I’m just a girl! And that’s okay!

Swara is a an award winning actor of the Hindi film industry. Her last few films, including Veere Di Wedding, Anaarkali of Aaraah and Nil Battey Sannata have earned her both critical and commercial success. Swara is an occasional writer of articles and opinion pieces. The occasions are frequent :).

Watch the trailer of Sharp Objects here:

Play

This article was published by the Scroll marketing team with Swara Bhasker on behalf of Hotstar Premium and not by the Scroll editorial team.