Why RTI Act not implemented by BCCI? CIC asks PMO

The Tribune: New Delhi: Monday, June 19, 2017.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and Law Ministry to explain why the Right to Information law has not been implemented by the Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI).

Taking note of the fact that BCCI has been recognised as a national sports federation by the government and has received tax exemptions to the tune of Rs 1,000 crore, Central Information Commissioner M Sridhar Acharyulu asked the PMO and Law Ministry to spell out their stand in 30 days.

The commission wondered why the government was not bringing the BCCI under the RTI Act despite saying so in the Lok Sabha in response to a question in 2012.

The order comes barely a week after the CIC asked the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (COA) to adopt transparency in BCCI’s functioning and to “immediately initiate efforts” to look into the issues raised by historian Ramachandra Guha who quit the committee citing conflict of interest in the cricket body.

In a judgment which can potentially herald an era of transparency in the world’s richest cricket body, the CIC had on June 9 asked the BCCI to make maximum disclosures on its official website to facilitate public scrutiny of its functioning.

The CIC also asked why is the Indian cricket team was still using a BCCI logo which resembled Star of India honour given by the British to their favourite princes in colonial times.

“Why the government does not change the logo to a truly Indian symbol with either Tricolour or four lions or Ashokas Dharm Chakra or any other decided by it?” it asked.

In all, the CIC sought explanations on five such questions from the PMO and Law Ministry while deciding a plea of activist RTI Subhash Agrawal.

These included status of a Bill to prevent sports fraud and match fixing and why the government was not bringing a uniform policy for rewarding winning international sports persons to prevent unhealthy competition for publicity among various governments.

It asked the government to consider shifting sports from state list of the Constitution to the concurrent list to facilitate a uniform policy and law on the sports bodies making them answerable under the RTI Act.