No Indian has apparently filed a nomination for the post of International Cricket Council (ICC) chairperson due to ‘matters pending with Supreme Court’, it has been learnt, although there has been no confirmation about the list of nominees from the ICC.
There have been unconfirmed reports that Singapore’s Imran Khwaja and New Zealand’s Greg Barclay were the only two nominees when the last date of filing nominations closed on Sunday.
BCCI president Sourav Ganguly was considered a key contender for the post which was vacated by Shashank Manohar earlier this year, who quit following two terms. However, it has been learnt that Ganguly did not file nomination due to issues pending in the Supreme Court.
“There are many issues pending with Supreme Court. Like this new constitution (of the BCCI), which puts restrictions. The Board had to keep that in mind which is why no Indian, including Ganguly, features in the list of nominees,” said a source close to the development.
Also, the Annual General Meeting (AGM) that alone decides important matters dealing with the world governing body, had to be held by September 30 but has been postponed due to Covid-19. There is no provision in the constitution that gives the governing body or Apex Council the right to delegate decision-making powers on matters such as these to office-bearers.
Technically, nothing stops Ganguly from becoming ICC chairperson unlike in the case of Srinivasan, who is already over 70 and disqualified due to age. But if Ganguly were to go to ICC, then he’d have to vacate his BCCI post just like Manohar did when he became the ICC chairperson. Anurag Thakur became the Board president back in 2016 after Manohar stepped down to take over ICC as chairperson. Clause 14 (9) in the constitution says, “Any vacancy in the Apex Council due to death, resignation, insolvency, unsoundness of mind, nomination to the ICC or other disqualifications shall be filled up for the remaining period…”
The Board administration is of the opinion that as it is, it was tough to get five-seven people for the posts last time around — last year when new dispensation took charge — because most seasoned administrators had to be excluded due to various clauses in the constitution related to tenure and cooling-off period.
“When you have limited people then if you send someone there (to ICC), it is an issue. Because of the clauses in the new constitution, even N Srinivasan couldn’t be considered as nominee,” added the source.
A few months back, the board had filed an application with the Supreme Court to seek extension of the tenures of Ganguly and BCCI secretary Jay Shah, both of whom had completed their tenures and had to undergo cooling-off period. The SC didn’t hear it, leaving the matter pending. The two have continued to be in charge since.
The ICC constitution is silent even on simple matters of election, let alone the intricacies – it is unclear if 2/3rd majority or simple majority will be used to elect the chairperson. The elections have been a confidential process.
When contacted by IANS, the ICC responded without divulging anything. “The process as agreed by the ICC Board, is underway and being overseen by the independent chairman of the Audit Committee. Information on the outcome of the process will be shared at its conclusion,” the response said.