Lodha committee amends IPL governing council recommendation

The Lodha Committee has withdrawn its recommendation to the BCCI to have nominees of two franchises sit on the IPL Governing Council on a rotational basis.

The motive behind the recommendation, the Committee had noted in its report, released in January, was to bring more independent voices into the Governing Council. The BCCI, however, had objected, saying having the franchises on the governing council would lead to conflict of interest considering the panel takes influential decisions related to the teams, players and match officials.

In its seminal judgement delivered on July 18, the two-judge bench of the Supreme Court had made it binding upon the BCCI to implement virtually all the recommendations laid down by the Lodha Committee to enhance the governance structure both at the board and the state associations.

With regards to the proposal to bring in franchises on the IPL Governing Council , the court observed there was "evident conflict of interest between the nominees of the IPL franchisees on the one hand and their role as members of the Governing Council on the other".

The Lodha Committee had proposed that the IPL Governing Council comprise nine members: three ex-officio members (the BCCI secretary, treasurer, and CEO), two representatives of the members of BCCI to be elected by the General Body, two nominees of the franchises, one nominee who is the Comptroller and Auditor General's representative on the Apex Council (the proposed body that would replace the Working Committee, the BCCI's highest decision-making body), and one nominee from the players' association. It was recommended that the nominees of the franchises rotate annually.

In its original report released on January 4, the Lodha Committee had noted that the governance of the IPL left a lot to be desired. The three-member committee, comprising RM Lodha, the former chief justice of the Supreme Court, and justices Ashok Bhan and RV Raveendran, former judges in the Supreme Court, had said the franchise were denied a say in the governance of the league despite being responsible "for fostering competition and making revenue".

During its meeting on August 28 in Delhi, the Lodha Committee revisited the issue and after deliberations decided to amend the recommendation.

"The Committee was initially of the view that if a question arose that were to be determined by the IPL Governing Council where the presence of a franchisee nominee would lead to a potential conflict of interest, then a reference could be made under Rule 38 (3) to determine whether the conflict was tractable, in which situation the conflict could be resolved by the recusal of the person concerned," the Committee said in a supplementary report from Sunday's meeting.

"However, when the question of the autonomy and independence within the Governing Council was considered, it was noted that apart from the CEO who is an ex-officio member, the presence of the Players' representative and the nominee of the Comptroller & Auditor General would more than satisfy the requirement of the 'independent oversight within the Governing Council.

"Therefore, to avoid any complaint or doubt about the presence of franchisees' representatives leading to conflict of interest situations, this Committee is of the view that: the recommendation to have Franchisee representatives on the IPL Governing Council be treated as withdrawn."