<p>The draft of the revised National Sports Bill has sought to bring the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under its purview, something which is unlikely to go down well with the cricket body.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Working Group, constituted by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS), under the Chairmanship of Justice (Retd) Mukul Mudgal has prepared a revised draft of the National Sports Development Bill. <br /><br />Justice Mudgal, who submitted the draft to Sports Minister Jitender Singh on Wednesday, said they had recommended bringing BCCI under the sports bill and thus the RTI Act.<br />“We have recommended it. It is now upto the sports ministry whether they wish to take it forward,” Justice Mudgal told Deccan Herald.<br /><br />The clause (h) of the draft makes it clear: “In order to represent India in international events and to have a right for a particular sport federation to use ‘India’ or ‘Indian’ in the sport scenario, the federation shall have to comply with Chapter IV (Unethical practices in Sports) and Chapter IX (Applicability of Right to Information Act).”<br /><br />The "elimination of Unethical practices in Sports" include provisions for elimination of doping, fraud of age, sexual harassment of athletes and violation of code of ethics. If brought under the bill, then BCCI would also have to adhere to these guidelines. <br /><br />The BCCI is not a National Sports Federation and has staunchly opposed any government interference and refused to come under the RTI ambit, saying it is registered as a 'society'. The RTI can be applied only to government organisations or those supported financially by it.<br />A top source in the Sports Ministry, however, said they would be “pushing” to bring BCCI under the RTI. “If the bill gets passed, we will be pushing for it, no doubt about it,” the source told Deccan Herald.<br />Former sports minister Ajay Maken too had lobbied to bring BCCI under the RTI in December 2011 insisting there were "just and reasonable grounds" for this. The original bill, however, did not get the nod of the Union Cabinet.<br />DH News Service</p>
<p>The draft of the revised National Sports Bill has sought to bring the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under its purview, something which is unlikely to go down well with the cricket body.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Working Group, constituted by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS), under the Chairmanship of Justice (Retd) Mukul Mudgal has prepared a revised draft of the National Sports Development Bill. <br /><br />Justice Mudgal, who submitted the draft to Sports Minister Jitender Singh on Wednesday, said they had recommended bringing BCCI under the sports bill and thus the RTI Act.<br />“We have recommended it. It is now upto the sports ministry whether they wish to take it forward,” Justice Mudgal told Deccan Herald.<br /><br />The clause (h) of the draft makes it clear: “In order to represent India in international events and to have a right for a particular sport federation to use ‘India’ or ‘Indian’ in the sport scenario, the federation shall have to comply with Chapter IV (Unethical practices in Sports) and Chapter IX (Applicability of Right to Information Act).”<br /><br />The "elimination of Unethical practices in Sports" include provisions for elimination of doping, fraud of age, sexual harassment of athletes and violation of code of ethics. If brought under the bill, then BCCI would also have to adhere to these guidelines. <br /><br />The BCCI is not a National Sports Federation and has staunchly opposed any government interference and refused to come under the RTI ambit, saying it is registered as a 'society'. The RTI can be applied only to government organisations or those supported financially by it.<br />A top source in the Sports Ministry, however, said they would be “pushing” to bring BCCI under the RTI. “If the bill gets passed, we will be pushing for it, no doubt about it,” the source told Deccan Herald.<br />Former sports minister Ajay Maken too had lobbied to bring BCCI under the RTI in December 2011 insisting there were "just and reasonable grounds" for this. The original bill, however, did not get the nod of the Union Cabinet.<br />DH News Service</p>
