Sourav Ganguly's defence: CAC is defunct, so conflict of interest clause is irrelevant

This follows the allegation made by three Kolkata-based individuals - Ranjit Kr. Seal, Abhishek Mukherjee and Bhaswati Santua - that Ganguly is in a potentially conflicted position for his dual role as the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) president and the IPL franchise Delhi Capitals advisor. Ganguly has already filed his written response to Justice Jain. A BCCI note sent through chief executive Rahul Johri to the ombudsman reportedly stated that Ganguly's dual role as the CAC member and Capitals advisor, too, needs to be examined. The CAC comprising Ganguly, Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman, however, is defunct for the last two years, as it last met in 2017, when Ravi Shastri was appointed as the head coach of the Indian team. In December last year, the Committee of Administrators (CoA) headed by Vinod Rai had formed an ad-hoc committee comprising Kapil Dev, Anshuman Gaekwad and Shantha Rangaswamy to pick the head coach for the Indian women's cricket team after the CAC members had recused themselves. Ganguly is tight-lipped on the issue, but according to a former BCCI legal counsel, when a committee is defunct, then there can be no conflict of interest. Also, as he pointed out, if the CAC is still active, then both Tendulkar and Laxman come 'under the same purview', as they have mentorial roles in Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad respectively. Item No. 5 of the Article 38. (1) in the new BCCI constitution deals with the 'position of influence'. As per 38. (1) (v), a conflict of interest can happen: 'When the individual occupies a post that calls for decisions of governance, management or selection to be made, and where a friend, relative or close affiliate is in the zone of consideration or subject to such decision-making, control or management. 'Also, when the individual holds any stake, voting rights or power to influence the decisions of a franchise/club/team that participates in the commercial league(s) under BCCI'… Citing this, the ex-BCCI counsel said captains of the IPL franchises, too, in that case can be in potentially conflicted position, if they are part of the national team or team management. 'Before the Lodha reforms, the BCCI used to keep the central contracts of the contracted players in abeyance during the IPL months. This was to allow the players the liberty to play the IPL without any potential conflict (if at all it applied). The principle for any conflict is the likelihood of bias. If there's no likelihood of bias, then you shouldn't be bothered,' he told this paper. DailyhuntDisclaimer: This story is auto-aggregated by a computer program and has not been created or edited by Dailyhunt. Publisher: The Indian Expresshttps://smaforetagslan.blogspot.com/2019/04/hyra-en-fastighetsmaklare.html

https://able2know.org/user/meetupperse/