BCCI not covered by RTI law

[sidmis]

BCCI not covered by RTI law
Press Trust of India
Friday, January 25, 2008 7:42 PM (New Delhi)
Reported by NDTV.com: BCCI not covered by RTI law

The country's apex cricket governing body BCCI could not be made accountable to provide information to citizens under the Right to Information law, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has held.
In a recent order, the CIC rejected a citizen's plea to seek from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) certain information about its affairs.

Nagpur-based Anil Chintaman Khare in his RTI application had submitted that BCCI was registered under the Societies Registration Act and should be termed a "public authority" for the purposes of making it accountable under the transparency law.

The BCCI, however, contested the applicant's claim stating that despite being registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, it was not constituted under the Constitution or any law made by the Parliament or any state legislature.

Concurring with BCCI's stand, Information Commissioner Padma Balasubramanian said: "Registration under an Act is different from being established under it. Merely because BCCI is registered under the Societies Registration Act, does not bring it under the purview of RTI Act."

In its arguments before the Commission, the BCCI had contended that it did not receive any funds, directly or indirectly, from the Centre and also did not have on its board any nominee from any government.

The applicant said BCCI received a lot of tax benefits from the government and hence should be made answerable to the people of the country.

The Commission came to its decision after finding that BCCI did not fall under any of the categories required to bring any public office under the RTI Act.

[meteor]

Dear sidmis,

CIC's ruling is quite unfortunate. BCCI, whatever may be its status, represents India in the field of cricket. Huge money is involved which is public money, in some way or other. So, it should be transparent.

- meteor

[sidmis]

Hello Meteor,
I fully agree with you. This decision of the commission has a a lot of other consequences. BCCI should not have been left scot free like this.

Once the decision comes, lets see what's the logic behind this decision.

Sidmis

[sidmis]

DECISION:
To bring any entity as a public authority within the ambit of the RTI Act, it has to satisfy at least one of the requirements of Section 2(f). In the present case, BCCI, as explained in its comments, does not fall under any of the categories stipulated in Section 2(f).

Registration under an Act is different from being established under an Act.
Therefore, merely because BCCI is registered under the Societies Registration Act, does not bring BCCI under the purview of the RTI Act. Accordingly, since BCCI is not a public authority in terms of Section 2(f) of the Act, no direction can be given to the BCCI to furnish the information to the appellant and accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

I wonder why the complainant went all the way to the CIC, he could have
complained to the Tamilnadu Information Commission, since the Board is
registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.

Here's the Full Version of the Decision ...

SidMis

[Satish Gupta]

The spirit of RTI extends well beyond the express categories mentioned in the Act. Any body/agency that derives substantial part of its revenue or power from the government is covered by RTI.

Can anyone send a cricket team to represent India against Australia? If not, why not? If anyone can send a team, then BCCI should be treated as a private organization. However if BCCI is authorized by some agreement between BCCI and government, giving BCCI exclusive power to represent India, then BCCI must be transparent in its operations. It should be covered under RTI. The agreement does not have to be in writing. If the actions of the government are such, that it grants exclusive powers to BCCI then it should satisfy the requirement.

There is provision in CIC regulations to appeal to the chief commissioner if someone is not satisfied with the ruling of one commissioner. This might be one such occasion.

[ganpat1956]

Originally Posted by Satish Gupta

Can anyone send a cricket team to represent India against Australia? If not, why not? If anyone can send a team, then BCCI should be treated as a private organization. However if BCCI is authorized by some agreement between BCCI and government, giving BCCI exclusive power to represent India, then BCCI must be transparent in its operations. It should be covered under RTI. The agreement does not have to be in writing. If the actions of the government are such, that it grants exclusive powers to BCCI then it should satisfy the requirement.

An excellent point of view to marshall the arguments and sustain the case further. I hope the persons concerned take due note of this and prefer their appeal before the full bench.

[karira]

Other points to be considered:

1. State associations affiliated to BCCI use State land for building Stadiums at subsidised prices.
2. Matches in India are held in these stadiums.

[wagh7]

Sirs,

I agree with the comments and views of all above posts.

I strongly feel that BCCI should come under RTI Act.

Because when Large public Intrest is there RTI act allowing even every personl information to disclose under RTI Act.

When personl information of a single person is comming under RTI Act, How so big Organization BCCI does not come under RTI Act?

BCCI is representing India in all world cricket. Huge public money is involved, the chief's of BCCI are very noted and having very much social responsibility.

As Karira noted that these Associations using Govt. Land for play, practice and administrative purposes, for conducting matches using Govt. Stadiums through out the country.

Hence I strongly give my openion that BCCI should be brought under the perview of RTI Act.

rakatkam

[wagh7]

dear friends,

I think, before giving such decision, CIC should advocate in favour of applicant and such decisions should be revived.

ra katkam.

[pma1212]

Talking about the BCCI let's accept that it is not accountable to Govt. of India and to the people of india . In such a case, why should not the goverment consider recovering the cost of security and facilities provided during the matches and to the visiting and home teams. why should they be granted stadia at token lease, why not at commercial rate, why should they be allowed to burn flood lights, when India is running short of electricity. let them arrange for their security arrangemnets, their stadia and their electricity and then let's see if they can boast to be the richest board!

[wagh7]

Dear sirs,

We have to strongly advocate and fight for the total taking over of BCCI by Govt. of India.

[ganpat1956]

Rakatkam,
May I remind you--this place is not for advocating any campaign or movement or fight.