CHENNAI: Hours after seven state units of BCCI wrote a strongly-worded letter to the Vinod Rai-headed Committee of Administrators (CoA) over their silence on the alleged sexual harassment charges against its CEO Rahul Johri, the Supreme Court-appointed committee responded by forming an independent committee chaired by retired Allahabad HC Judge Justice Rakesh Sharma. Johri will continue to be on leave until the probe is finished.
The independent committee which also includes former Central Bureau of Investigation director PC Sharma and Barkha Singh, former chairperson of the Delhi Commission for Women, will examine the allegations and will table its finding and recommendations in 15 days.
Johri, who was asked to explain his charges made by an anonymous Twitter handle when the #MeToo movement surfaced in India, on October 20 denied the allegations to the CoA. In a statement issued on Thursday evening, the CoA said, after Johri filed his reply, they met on October 20 and 22 with the BCCI’s legal wing to decide on the next course of action.
However, the decision to appoint an independent committee doesn’t seem to have been straight-forward. The CoA, in the statement, revealed there were differences between Rai and Diana Edulji, who advocated for Johri to resign or his contract be terminated with immediate effect considering the details and nature of the allegation.
But, Rai disagreed with Edulji, and called for an independent panel to be set up as the complaint was anonymous and the issue pertains to the period before Johri joined BCCI. “(sic)...it was necessary to provide natural justice to the CEO by following a due process of law. The chairman was very clear that in similar instances, the person against whom allegations had been made, were permitted to represent their case before an independent committee which would then take a considered view after weighing all evidence,” the statement said.
The independent committee will also probe the allegations of sexual harassment made by a BCCI employee against Johri.
Earlier on Thursday evening, seven state units of the BCCI — Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Goa and Saurashtra — wrote to CoA and the office-bearers asking Johri to be suspended pending investigations. In a common sort of communication, with each of the letters — despite being sent by respective units — sounding similar, the members asked why the CoA has been silent on the issue which is denting the image of the BCCI.
They also asked why Rai, who seeks transparency, has been tight-lipped on the issue and Goa Cricket Association wondered if the harassment charges against Johri was properly dealt with.
Citing the incident involving pacer Mohammed Shami, who was accused by his wife of adultery, and whose contract was put on hold until an investigation was carried out by ACU chief Neeraj Kumar, all the units have asked why such a step was not taken against Johri. “...In this case, did the CoA ask any person to look into the matter or was it left to the discretion of the person accused to present the facts completely?” asked TNCA. Questions to some of these answers might be forthcoming after the probe.
venkatakrishna@newindianexpress.com