Rule 39(1) of the new BCCI Constitution states: “The BCCI shall appoint an Ethics Officer at the Annual General Meeting for the purpose of guidance and resolution in instances of conflict of interest. The Ethics Officer shall be a retired Judge of a High Court so appointed by the BCCI after obtaining his/her consent and on terms as determined by the BCCI in keeping with the dignity and stature of the office. The term of an Ethics Officer shall be one year, subject to a maximum of 3 terms in office.”
The post of Ethics Officer had been lying vacant, although CoA had mentioned to the Supreme Court for the requirement of an Ethics Officer in their 10th Status Report submitted on October 28, 2018. However, the SC had not passed any order in this regard.
The CoA on March 12 addressed an email to Jain, requesting him to consider if he would be willing to assume the role and discharge the functions of the BCCI Ethics Officer — as a pro tem measure till such time that an ethics officer is appointed.
In response, the ombudsman in his letter dated March 21 gave his consent to discharge the duty on an ad hoc basis. With a view to ensure that the measures for avoidance of conflict of interest are implemented immediately and complaints/references relating to conflict of interest can be considered and addressed, the CoA took the step.
"The Ld. Ombudsman of the BCCI, the Hon'ble Justice D.K. Jain (retd.), shall discharge the functions of the BCCI Ethics Officer, in addition to his role as the BCCI Ombudsman, as an ad hoc arrangement till such time that an Ethics Officer is appointed," the CoA said in its latest status report.
The Ombudsman is already handling the Hardik Pandya-KL Rahul matter after the duo had made inappropriate comments in a TV chat show ‘Koffee with Karan’ and were suspended pending enquiry.
While the suspension was removed as there was no Ombudsman to look into the matter, Jain has now been handed responsibility to decide the way forward.
First Published: March 28, 2019, 1:57 PM IST