Modi lashes out at BCCI amidst controversy

Lalit Modi left India after the third edition of the IPL

Former IPL chairman, Lalit Modi, made several claims regarding procedural irregularities in the BCCI and IPL, including some cases where he faces legal action. These statements were made by Modi to the India Today TV channel, in response to the swirling controversy which involved India's foreign minister Sushma Swaraj. It had been discovered that the minister helped Modi secure documents to travel out of the country, where he had been residing since 2010.

These claims once again point out the close links between cricket and politics in India, where several senior ministers seem to hold top positions in the BCCI from the past few decades.

Modi departed from India after the completion of the third edition of the IPL in 2010. This was around the same time when the federal finance ministry had launched several investigations into IPL-related issues. Modi had been barred from the BCCI in 2013 after a disciplinary committee, headed by Arun Jaitley - who is now the country's finance minister, found him guilty of indiscipline and misconduct on eight instances.

These allegations and investigations led to Modi’s passport being revoked by the Indian Government, therefore confining him to the United Kingdom. According to a story published by Sunday Times on June 14, Modi had requested for a certificate of travel from the British Government last year, to travel to Portugal, to tend to his wife who was scheduled to go to surgery. The British Government had then refused to grant the certificate on grounds that he was fugitive from Indian law. The certificate was later granted after Swaraj reassured that India had no objection to Modi traveling.

He subsequently won a case in India to have his passport revocation overturned, which now makes him free to enter the country.

Swaraj stated that her decision to help Modi was solely on compassionate grounds. This has created a storm of controversy, one of which is that he was a fugitive from the Indian government and had several cases against him.

Another controversy that is creating havoc is that Swaraj’s daughter is Modi’s legal counsel in the case and that the minister’s interest may have been a conflict of interest. Other controversies include whether or not Swaraj’s ministry went through the finance ministry before approving Modi’s request, and whether her actions were a quid pro quo for Modi helping her nephew with university admissions in the UK in 2013.

Modi has had an irritable relationship with politicians who have controlled the BCCI over the past few decades. The cause of his downfall also seems to be his decision to take on a minister in the then Congress government, Shashi Tharoor, over the sale of “Kochi Tuskers” IPL franchise rights.

Modi stated that the BCCI’s disciplinary committee did not give him a fair chance to present his case. "That committee didn't let me come on air", Modi said. "The day I was supposed to come on air and go on to trial with them, that's the day when they decided to end the committee."

He also said that N Srinivasan’s excluded him from all the financial activities relating to the 2009 IPL, which was moved to South Africa and was later in controversy with the Foreign Exchange Management Act.

"(Arun) Jaitley was part of the process of moving it to South Africa. So was Mr. Srinivasan. So was Mr Jyotiraditya Scindia. So was Mr (Sharad) Pawar. I was just a member of that committee. The decision was taken by the committee.

"I have said the BCCI was wrong in the way they operated the financial accounts in South Africa. That's the basis on which the ED has penalised the BCCI for Rs 1600 crore.

"It is my reply to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) which says very clearly that (then BCCI president) Shashank Manohar proposed that the BCCI should open accounts in South Africa subject to RBI approval. I was excluded by Mr Srinivasan's office in their financial process.

"He said in writing, 'I am deciding how the bank accounts will be operated, and I will decide how the money will be transferred.' He made a committee - and this is the core connection - and he decided not to take the Reserve Bank of India's approval, and decided on that basis to transfer money out. I had no role to play in that and I have shown clearly in my documentation to that effect."