The Law Commission of India has concluded that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) ought to be covered by the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act)..The recommendation was made in the Law Commission’s 275th report on the Legal Framework of BCCI vis-à-vis Right to Information Act..The report was prepared pursuant to the directions issued in 2016 in the case of BCCI v Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors. The Supreme Court in this case had tasked the Commission with examining whether the BCCI would be covered under the ambit of the RTI Act..Answering this query in the affirmative, the Commission has also made appropriate recommendations to fix more accountability on the BCCI..In addition to perusing Parliamentary debates, case laws, commentaries and the like, the Commission also carried out extensive consultation with experts and stakeholders to prepare the report..However, it has been noted that the BCCI did not respond to calls for participation, despite notices and reminders issued by the Commission for the same..The report itself delves into the history of cricket, the importance of RTI laws qua sports bodies, the character of public authorities and the legal status of the BCCI, to arrive at its conclusions..BCCI is amenable to RTI jurisdiction, whether ‘public authority’ or ‘State’.Ultimately, the Commission has concluded that the BCCI would have to be covered under the RTI regime..It is noted that the BCCI already assumes the character of a public authority, even if it were to continue being regarded as a private body. This stance is taken considering the monopolistic character of the body, coupled with the public nature of its functions. Besides, the “substantial financing” it has received from governments over the years also serves to buttress this point..Going one step further, the Commission has opined that the BCCI ought to be classified as a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution..A distinction was made between ‘public authority’ and ‘State’ as under Article 12. It was noted that the government exercises less control over a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, than what is required under Article 12 of the Constitution. Calling for more government control over the BCCI, the report states,.“Thus, the threshold for ‘public authority’ being lower than that of ‘State’ under Article 12, bastions the argument that BCCI would have to be covered under the RTI regime.”.Recommendations for a more accountable BCCI.Firstly, the Commission recommends that the BCCI be viewed as an agency or instrumentality of State, under Article 12 of the Constitution, thereby making it amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32..Next, the Commission has opined that the BCCI should be held accountable for any violations of basic human rights of the stakeholders, under all circumstances..Thirdly, it is recommended that the BCCI be expressly mentioned in the list of National Sports Federations (NSFs) available on the Union Ministry’s website. The report notes that,.“This express mention would automatically bring BCCI within the purview of RTI Act. Other sports bodies listed as NSFs’ in Annual Report 2016-17, 177 of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports available on its website do attract the provisions of the RTI Act. .This website also contains information regarding (Chief Public Information Officer) CPIOs and Appellate Authorities catering to RTI requests addressed to specific NSFs. In light of the above stated facts, since all other sports bodies which are listed as NSFs are covered under the RTI Act, it is inconceivable as to why BCCI should be an exception.”.Finally, for the record, the Commission has unequivocally recommended that the RTI Act be made applicable to BCCI along with all of its constituent member cricketing associations, provided they fulfil the criteria applicable to BCCI, as discussed in the Report..Read the 275th Report of the Law Commission of India below:.Image courtesy: Livemint
The Law Commission of India has concluded that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) ought to be covered by the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act)..The recommendation was made in the Law Commission’s 275th report on the Legal Framework of BCCI vis-à-vis Right to Information Act..The report was prepared pursuant to the directions issued in 2016 in the case of BCCI v Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors. The Supreme Court in this case had tasked the Commission with examining whether the BCCI would be covered under the ambit of the RTI Act..Answering this query in the affirmative, the Commission has also made appropriate recommendations to fix more accountability on the BCCI..In addition to perusing Parliamentary debates, case laws, commentaries and the like, the Commission also carried out extensive consultation with experts and stakeholders to prepare the report..However, it has been noted that the BCCI did not respond to calls for participation, despite notices and reminders issued by the Commission for the same..The report itself delves into the history of cricket, the importance of RTI laws qua sports bodies, the character of public authorities and the legal status of the BCCI, to arrive at its conclusions..BCCI is amenable to RTI jurisdiction, whether ‘public authority’ or ‘State’.Ultimately, the Commission has concluded that the BCCI would have to be covered under the RTI regime..It is noted that the BCCI already assumes the character of a public authority, even if it were to continue being regarded as a private body. This stance is taken considering the monopolistic character of the body, coupled with the public nature of its functions. Besides, the “substantial financing” it has received from governments over the years also serves to buttress this point..Going one step further, the Commission has opined that the BCCI ought to be classified as a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution..A distinction was made between ‘public authority’ and ‘State’ as under Article 12. It was noted that the government exercises less control over a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, than what is required under Article 12 of the Constitution. Calling for more government control over the BCCI, the report states,.“Thus, the threshold for ‘public authority’ being lower than that of ‘State’ under Article 12, bastions the argument that BCCI would have to be covered under the RTI regime.”.Recommendations for a more accountable BCCI.Firstly, the Commission recommends that the BCCI be viewed as an agency or instrumentality of State, under Article 12 of the Constitution, thereby making it amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32..Next, the Commission has opined that the BCCI should be held accountable for any violations of basic human rights of the stakeholders, under all circumstances..Thirdly, it is recommended that the BCCI be expressly mentioned in the list of National Sports Federations (NSFs) available on the Union Ministry’s website. The report notes that,.“This express mention would automatically bring BCCI within the purview of RTI Act. Other sports bodies listed as NSFs’ in Annual Report 2016-17, 177 of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports available on its website do attract the provisions of the RTI Act. .This website also contains information regarding (Chief Public Information Officer) CPIOs and Appellate Authorities catering to RTI requests addressed to specific NSFs. In light of the above stated facts, since all other sports bodies which are listed as NSFs are covered under the RTI Act, it is inconceivable as to why BCCI should be an exception.”.Finally, for the record, the Commission has unequivocally recommended that the RTI Act be made applicable to BCCI along with all of its constituent member cricketing associations, provided they fulfil the criteria applicable to BCCI, as discussed in the Report..Read the 275th Report of the Law Commission of India below:.Image courtesy: Livemint