Aditya Verma writes letter to ICC citing N Srinivasan's violation of Code of Ethics

N Srinivasan

Dear Mr HigginsHead of LegalInternational Cricket Council.

Notification of violation of Code of Ethics by ICC director Mr N Srinivasan

Pursuant to the Code of Ethics for the ICC (the “Code”), it is a mandatory requirement that any Director (as defined at Clause 1.1 of the Code) shall:

“[..] act in an honest and ethical manner. In order to facilitate the transparent operation of the ICC, conduct that gives the appearance of impropriety will also be unacceptable. Directors shall not engage in any conduct that in any way denigrates the ICC or harms its public image. No funds or assets of the ICC may be used for any unlawful purpose, and no Director may engage in unlawful conduct.” (Clause 2.1.)

and

“[…] at all times serve the interests of the ICC and the sport of cricket as a whole.” (Clause 3.2).

Mr Srinivasan, being a Director of the ICC under the Code, was bound by the terms of the Code .

We believe that Mr Srinivasan has violated Clause 2.1 of the Code on a number of occasions, having acted in a manner which denigrates the ICC and harms its public image. Furthermore, his continued embroilment in the matter referred to below does not serve the interests of the ICC and the sport of cricket as a whole.

This letter is not intended to serve as an exhaustive description of the full extent of Mr Srinivasan’s violations. It is formal notification of just some of his violations which should be reported to the ICC Ethics Officer for further investigation.

Violations of Clause 2.1 of the Code

In 2013, an investigation into match-fixing by the Mumbai and Delhi Police (CR.No. 61/2013 and FIR No. 21/2013 respectively) found that certain individuals had been engaged in passing insider information to bookmakers. One of these individuals was Mr Meiyappan, the son-in-law of Mr Srinivasan, and the suspected principal of the Chennai Super Kings IPL franchise.

In response to the findings made by the Mumbai and Delhi Police, the BCCI convened an internal probe panel on 28 May 2013. The panel was tasked by the BCCI with reviewing evidence in respect of Jaipur (IPL) Cricket Pvt. Ltd, Mr Raj Kundra (the majority owner of the Rajasthan Royals IPL team), Mr Meiyappan and India Cements Ltd (of which Mr Srinivasan is the Managing Director). The panel sat for one day and cleared all of the parties of any wrongdoing, without seeking any input from either police force.

The basis upon which the BCCI nominated the 2 members of the panel was not disclosed, and was eventually subject to a formal complaint to the Mumbai High Court (No.55/2013). After hearing this complaint, the Mumbai High Court, in its order of 8 October 2013, held that the constitution of the panel had been ultra vires of the BCCI Regulations and Operational Rules. The Supreme Court of India subsequently appointed an independent committee headed by Mr Justice Mudgal to investigate the matter fully and match-fixing in the IPL more widely.

An initial report by Justice Mudgal made a number of findings in relation to Mr Meiyappan and Mr Srinivasan. These findings include the following:

1. “The role of Mr Meiyappan in Chennai Super Kings stands proved, as does his role in passing on insider information. His wider role in match-fixing is still under investigation”. [p.68-73 of Vol. 1 of the Mudgal Report]. He was in fact the team owner of Chennai Super Kings. Mr Srinivasan’s press statement on 27 May 2013 that “he [Gurunath] did not have any role. He never visited the CSK office, but he would go [to the matches], he is very enthusiastic [..]” cannot, therefore, be accurate.

1. “The franchise owner (India Cements Ltd.), of which Mr Srinivasan is the Managing Director, is responsible for failing to ensure that Mr Meiyappan (a Team Official) had complied with the BCCI Anti-Corruption Code, IPL Operational Handbook, and the IPL Regulations, in particular Section 4.4.1 of the IPL Operational Rules and Clause 11.3 of the Franchise’s Agreement”. [p.68-73 of Vol.1 of the Mudgal Report].

1. Certain witnesses who provided evidence to the panel, which may have included Mr Srinivasan on behalf of India Cements Ltd, tried to “erase proof of Mr Meiyappan’s link with Chennai Super Kings” [p.13 of Vol. 1 of the Mudgal Report].

1. There was a clear conflict of interest in Mr Srinivasan holding the position of President of the BCCI at the same time as being the Managing Director of India Cements Limited, the owner of the Chennai Super Kings franchise (Clause 6.2.4 of the BCCI Rules and Regulations). Mr Srinivasan subsequently amended the BCCI Rules and Regulations to enable him to hold both positions. The amendment, and the issue of conflict of interest, are now being examined separately. [p.77-78 of Vol. 1 of the Mudgal Report].

These findings were made as part of the first Mudgal Report. A further investigation is now being conducted by the same panel into the match-fixing in the IPL and is due to be submitted to the Supreme Court of India by the end of August 2014.

Mr Srinivasan has drawn heavy criticism from the Supreme Court (the highest court in India) and in the media around the world, for failing to abide by the Court’s recommendation that he should step down as President of the BCCI while Justice Mudgal conducts his investigation. His position ultimately became untenable and the Supreme Court during the course of hearing observed that Srinivasan has to step down for a fair investigation into the allegation of betting. The Judges further observed that "It's nauseating that N. Srinivasan continued as BCCI chief, he should go if cricket has to be cleaned”.

Mr Srinivasan’s initial resistance to the Court’s recommendation that he should step down as President of the ICC whilst the investigation was underway is unethical in its own right and a breach of Clause 2.1 of the Code.

Mr Srinivasan was, until 28 March 2014 the President of the BCCI. In that capacity he is a senior member of the ICC’s Executive Board. As set out above, in the past year alone he has acted in a manner that has undoubtedly denigrated the ICC and harmed its public image. The links below set out just a small sample of the media reporting on his behaviour.

[http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/730917.html

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/bcci-chief-srinivasan-should-step-down-sc/article1-1200102.aspx

https://cricket.yahoo.com/news/srinivasan-named-in-match-fixing-report--supreme-court-073655323.html

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140326/sports-cricket/article/ipl-match-fixing-case-quit-or-face-sack-supreme-court-tells-bcci-chief

http://sports.ndtv.com/indian-premier-league-2014/news/223130-n-srinivasan-named-in-ipl-spot-fixing-probe-report-says-supreme-court]

Moreover, regardless of whether or not Mr Srinivasan is found to be guilty of corruption or complicit in its concealment, his conduct gives the “appearance of impropriety” and, consequently, is a breach of Clause 1.2 of the Code.

Finally, on 28 March 2014 the Supreme Court of India passed the following order, a copy of which is attached for ease of reference:

“We also direct that till we deliver the judgment, none of the employees of India Cement Limited or its associate companies (except cricket players or commentators) will perform any of the duties assigned to them by the BCCI.”

Mr Srinivasan is the Managing Director and employee of India Cement Limited. However, Mr Srinivasan duly attended the ICC Executive and IDI Board Meetings on 8 and 9 April 2014, in defiance of an order which has the force of law. He has therefore engaged in “unlawful conduct” in terms of Clause 2.1 of the Code. The order of the Supreme Court remains clear – no employees of India Cement Limited may perform any duties assigned to them by the BCCI.

Any Director of the ICC who assists Mr Srinivasan in such illegal conduct, or is complicit in such conduct, is himself acting in breach of the Code.

Furthermore, according to the abovementioned order of 28 March 2014, on that same date Mr Srinivasan had “made a written offer through his counsel that till investigation into which the allegations against him is completed he will not discharge any of the functions of the President of the BCCI.”

Obviously this undertaking was not made in good faith, since Mr Srinivasan proceeded to attend the ICC Board meetings on 8 and 9 April 2014 as a representative of the BCCI, discharging the functions of the President of the BCCI (as he has done at several ICC Board meetings over the last two years) and/or performing duties assigned to him by the BCCI.

The Supreme Court of India passed an order on 16 May 2014, a copy of which is attached for ease of reference directing investigation against thirteen persons including Mr. Srinivasan and has directed composition of an independent investigation team comprising officers of CBI, Mumbai Police and Delhi Police giving them wide powers to investigate, require attendance of witnesses, the power to examine witnesses, the power to search and the power to seize and all other powers necessary for investigation except the power to arrest .

Violation of Clause 3.2 of the Code

The media coverage around Mr Srinivasan’s alleged involvement in corrupt activities that has ensued over the last few months has been intense, prolonged and far-reaching, given the nature of the allegations.

The attendance by Mr Srinivasan at ICC Board meetings as a representative of the BCCI whilst he remains embroiled in such controversial, significant and highly publicised allegations was not, and cannot be, in the best interests of ICC or the sport of cricket. As such, this is a breach of Clause 3.2 of the Code.

Furthermore, according to the ICC Mr Srinivasan is due to be elected as Chairman of the ICC Board at its upcoming Board meetings and Annual Conference to be held in Melbourne in approximately one month’s time (see ICC official press release dated 8 February 2014 attached hereto for ease of reference).

The election of Mr Srinivasan as Chairman of the ICC Board is, by extension, certainly not in the best interests of ICC or the sport of cricket at this time, particularly when the disclosure of further corrupt activities in Twenty20 cricket is absorbing the headlines around the world. Apart from being irresponsible and a dereliction of their fiduciary duties as directors of the ICC, proceeding with such an election would place the directors on the Board of the ICC in breach of Clause 3.2 and Clause 8.1 of the Code.

Request for a formal review of violations of the Code

Pursuant to Clause 8.3 of the Code, having been made aware of multiple violations of the Code by Mr Srinivasan, you are obliged to formally report this matter to the Ethics Officer, Mr Sean Cleary, for further investigation. In terms of Clause 8.2 of the Code, the Ethics Officer has a positive obligation “to review all alleged violations of the Code of Ethics.”

We ask you to confirm within 7 days of receving the letter that you have complied with his obligation, and kindly remind you that failure to report such violations now that you are aware of them is itself a breach of code.

Under Clause 8.1 of the Code, all Directors are expected to use good judgement and protect the spirit of cricket. Upholding this duty is of critical importance at a time when the integrity of the game and its administration is under scrutiny. Kindly assure us, as an important stakeholder within the game of cricket, that the ICC will take appropriate steps to investigate these most serious violations.

Yours sincerely,

Aditya Verma

Secretary of Cricket Association of Bihar