Don't Legalise Betting In Cricket: Subramaniam

A Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae has disagreed with the Lodha Committee Recommendation to make betting legal in India as that would be “detrimental” to cricket as “it could encourage match fixing/spot fixing” due to an “unbreakable link” between the two malaise.

The only other recommendation that well-known lawyer Gopal Subramanium, tasked to suggest ways to the Supreme Court to implement the epoch-making recommendations to reform the BCCI, has not agreed with is the nomination of IPL franchisees on the IPL governing council. The Lodha panel had suggested two franchisees’ nominees on the governing council.

Apart from these two suggestions, Subramanium, himself a keen cricket follower, has concurred with all other suggestions of the committee headed by former Chief Justice of India RM Lodha, and has recommended that they all be implemented.

In his 32-page report, submitted with the Supreme Court this week, Subramanium has additionally suggested that the BCCI and its affiliated state associations should furnish financial reports on a quarterly basis and upload them on their websites. Interestingly, many of the 37 affiliate associations do not even have websites in existence.

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice of India TS Thakur and Justice FMI Kalifulla, is currently hearing arguments from the BCCI and its affiliates, who all have opposed the Lodha Committee recommendations to overhaul the structure and functioning of the BCCI, the richest cricket body in the world.

The hearings are likely to end in the coming week and the bench might pronounce an order/judgement before the Supreme Court closes on May 16 for the summer break.

The court had appointed the three-member Lodha Committee following a petition filed by the unrecognised Cricket Association of Bihar in the aftermath of the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal, particularly raising the issue of conflict of interest of key administrators of the BCCI.

On the issue of betting the Lodha Committee Report says: “A recommendation is made to legalise betting (with strong safeguards), except for those covered by the BCCI and IPL regulations. Also, a recommendation for match/spot-fixing to be made a criminal offence.”

Elsewhere, the report further explains: “While the issue of betting can be effectively dealt with by providing a legal framework, match/spot-fixing is neither pardonable nor a matter for regulation. The only way to deal with it is by making it a criminal offence punishable by law. The Committee recommends appropriate amendments by the legislature.

“As far as betting alone is concerned, many of the respondents before the Committee were of the view that it would serve both the game and economy if it were legalized as has been done in the United Kingdom. It cannot be overlooked that the worldwide legal sports betting market is worth over $400 billion,” it says. “While it is our recommendation that the legislatures ought to legalise betting in cricket, these must be with the following safeguards…”

The recommended safeguards included appointing “regulatory watchdogs”, furnishing of details of incomes and assets by “players, administrators and others closely associated with the sport”, and issuance of “licenses” to those placing the bets.

However, Subramanium in his report says betting in closely linked with match/spot-fixing and allowing betting could “encourage” those who are involved in the illegal activity.

“The Amicus respectfully suggests that the recommendation that betting be legalised ought not to be accepted. This could be detrimental as there is an unbreakable link between betting and match fixing/spot fixing. Betting in whichever form is likely to influence and encourage match fixing/spot fixing,” writes Subramanium in his report.

With regard to the IPL governing council, the Lodha Committee had recommended that IPL governing council, having a one-year term, should comprise nine members, who should be chosen at every BCCI annual general body meeting. Out of the nine members, four should be representatives of the BCCI general body, two representatives of IPL franchisees, one representative of the yet-to-be formed Cricket Players’ Association, and one nominee of the Comptroller & Auditor General, besides the BCCI CEO.

However, Subramanium wrote in his report: “It is submitted that the present composition of the IPL governing council as proposed by the Committee may be accepted subject to the exclusion of the nominee of the franchisee.”

On the issue of transparency, particularly dealing with finances, Subramanium said: “There must be a direction that all members (full and associate) must maintain all records and books of accounts to be available for scrutiny by the nominee of state Accountant General/Comptroller Accountant General. The final accounts may be published on the website.”

Subramanium further wrote: “Utilisation of funds and progress Reports must be furnished by all state associations in a quarterly manner.”

All in all, Subramanium has given a big thumbs-up to the Lodha Committee’s recommendations to reform the BCCI, which came into existence 87 years ago and has been running without any checks and balances by the central/state governments. The BCCI contends that since it doesn’t take any financial assistance from the government, it is not obliged to toe the government line.

However, the fact is that almost all cricket stadiums are built on land leased by the state governments, matches are organised with help of the police, and no teams can travel abroad or foreign teams can visit India without express permission by the central government. These are only a few examples of the assistance that the BCCI takes from the government.