MATCH REPORTS
STAT SHEET
DIARY
HOT LINKS
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
BOOKS & THINGS
PEOPLE
DEAR REDIFF

"The terms of reference must be made public"

The Board of Control for Cricket in India has finalised the terms of reference for the one-man committee of inquiry instituted to probe the allegations of betting, match-fixing and bribery in Indian cricket.

"Why haven't they released it to the media?" asks former chief justice Yashwant Vishnu Chandrachud, the man briefed with probing the allegations levelled, in recent times, by former all-rounder Manoj Prabhakar and sections of the media.

The eminent jurist declared, to Rediff, his intention of waiting for a further 24 hours and if the the terms of reference had not been released in that period of time, of calling up the BCCI and demanding to know just why it has not been done. "I had maintained all along that there can be no secrecy about the proceedings, I see no reason why the terms of reference should be kept from the public," Chandrachud told Rediff.

Informed that commentators and sections of the media - including this one - had speculated on the possibility that his appointment was part of an attempt by the BCCI to carry out a whitewash operation, Chandrachud's response was laughter. "Do you really see someone like me being a willing party to such an attempt?" he demanded. "People who think so need only review my track record of over 25 years as a jurist, to realise how absurd that charge is."

Granting his own personal probity, was it not a fact that he had no real powers to summon anyone, neither could he compel anyone to answer his questions, and that in the circumstances, his committee would be seriously hamstrung?

"Well, let us look at the legal angle. If I were on the bench now, and if the BCCI had approached the court asking for it to appoint an official committee of inquiry - a judicial committee - there is no guarantee that if I were hearing the case, I would have agreed. At best, it is 50-50 whether or no the court would have acceeded to the request. So the appointment of a private committee is not per se flawed.

"Secondly, what happens in departmental inquiries? It is not carried out under the aegis of any court, the officer conducting the inquiry does not have judicial sanction, he has no powers to exact compliance from those he wishes to summon, nor can he take any action against those who refuse to heed his request to appear before him. But such an inquiry, and the officer appointed to carry it out, does have its own persuasive power. I do not anticipate that people I wish to question will ignore my summons, even though I do not have the backing of the official law and order machinery," Chandrachud said.

Asked if he saw former players - including Manoj Prabhakar, the man at the centre of the storm - as also officials, journalists, the police and bookmakers all heeding his requests and appearing before him, Chandrachud was emphatic: "Yes, I see all of them responding to my summons. If I didn't think so, I wouldn't have taken up this job. Of course, I do not anticipate positive response from bookies - but that is because their actions are downright illegal, and they are hardly likely to come before me and admit to it. But you have to remember that the same applies even to a judicial inquiry - a sitting judge can summon anyone and ask him if he makes books, but if the person denies it, that's the end of it, right there. So in no way is my committee as valueless as has been made to appear!"