Match fixing: Jaitley says Sports Ministry should make changes in law

Indian Law Minister Arun Jaitley has said the 'misconduct' by cricketers found guilty by the CBI of match-fixing did not come under any of the existing penal provisions and it was for the Sports Ministry to suggest changes in the law to prosecute such offenders.

"Those found guilty of match-fixing did show misconduct. But the ingredients of misconduct strictly did not fit into any of the penal provisions of criminal code of conduct wherein they could be prosecuted," Jaitley told reporters in London on Wednesday.

The Sports Ministry had referred the case to him to find out whether any penal action could be taken based on the CBI report, Jaitley, who is also President of Delhi and District Cricket Association, said. "As of today, with the kind of evidence they have, all accusations showed misconduct by concerned cricketers and therefore, the Cricket Board was empowered to take action which they did," Jaitley said.

The minister said there was no proposal before the Law Ministry to incorporate penal provisions for such misconduct and added, "It is for the Department of Sports to consider."

"If such acts are repeatedly still taking place in spite of the exposures, then you have to come out with tougher provisions of law", Jaitley said.

Jaitley said among all the inquiries held into match-fixing in different countries, it was the Delhi police inquiry and the CBI probe which brought out all the evidence. "They have brought in hard evidence. They have not gone by surmises. The CBI has done a good job", he said.

Jaitley said the "legislative premises has always been that the evil sought to be curbed and the law you bring in must have some relationship of proportionality between the two."

"If you legislate and bring in penal action, the level of proof required is much higher. Then the proof has to be beyond reasonable doubt and for the Indian Cricket Board to proceed to take disciplinary action, the level of proof as in a civil litigation is a preponderance of probabilities. For a court to convict him the proof required will be beyond reasonable doubt", he said.