Eligibility of officials: Playing with laws to court sports disaster
View(s):
Panduka Keerthinanda
I was still enmeshed with the proposition of how to convince the local authority about the current cricket impasse and how it would impact the game’s future, when my friend Panduka Keerthinanda, a lawyer who has taken up the subject of Sports Law as his pet subject, kicked in an angle to my mind — and I am still reeling.
To be honest, I did not gather the real impact of the Keerthinanda argument immediately, but after a few cuts and bruises – yes, I did. He was really worried about some of the laws that have been tweeked by the former sports Minister Dayasiri Jayasekera in the guise of amending regulations to the sports law of this country. He said they just tired to swat a fly with this amendment; but in reality a whole swarm is affected as a result. Most of the 65 sports which are now within the realms of the Sports Ministry will be pole-axed without knowing what really hit them. The pose is who is eligible and who is not — to hold office.
So, this resulted in Keerthinanda unwinding a narration right from the beginning and he explained how the sports law was initially enforced. He said, “In the 1970s, under the Sirimavo R.D. Bandaranaike government, one of the first acts the then Sports Minister K.B. Ratnanayake formulated upon taking office was aimed at finding a method for the government to control, sustain and nurture sports in this country. There were about 34 mainstream sports at that time. There they appointed a three-member committee comprising T.B. Werapitiya, B.R. Heyn and Dr. N.H.R. Gunawardena. After a study, they recommended that there should be a sports law formulated and it came out as act No 25 of 1973.
“Some of the sports bodies that came under its wings were – Ceylon Athletic Association, Ceylon Badminton Association, Ceylon Basketball Association, Ceylon Boxing Association, Ceylon Cricket Association and Ceylon Football Association. The Minister could not take control of these Associations without an act of Parliament and this became the mechanism to do so”.
Keerthinanda explained thereafter the act was amended on several occasions. He said: “The sports law was subsequently amended in the following manner — act 47 of 1993, act 10 of 1998, act 33 of 2005. “It’s clearly mentioned the law has been enacted to develop the sport, control the sport and promote sports; they were the ingredients of the amendments.
“Then from time to time regulations are put in place. The regulations are made under the Sports Law of 31 and 41 to up keep the sports law as and when necessary. The first regulation was in 1974. Thereafter there were so many other regulations were set in motion. In 1974, a regulation covered all sports associations. In 1975 there was another on the same lines and so was in 1976, 1977 and 1978. Thereafter there were further regulations introduced and they came in 1988, 2005, 2013 and the last one in 2016.”
He said that every sports minister from K.B. Ratnayake to Navin Dissanayake recognised an enshrined clause which read, ‘… any person may be nominated for office bearers with the prior approval of the sports minister.’
Keerthinanda said that this was a criteria set in motion to elevate the standard of governance of a sports body. If there is a layman who has not engaged in a particular sport at the level that the sports law requires, but has the aptitude and other qualifications to help elevate the standard of that particular sport, the sports minister could grant approval to that person and give him authority to contest.
Then he added, “Unfortunately, in 2016, the regulation that was formulated the above clause has been done away with. One must understand that everyone who becomes a member of a sports association does on a voluntary basis – it’s a honourary job and you should be committed to drive the message of the Association that is he is a part of. To do that, they do not have to be persons who have engaged themselves actively in the given sport. Since clause has been taken away, there may be severe repercussions in the future.
“Even in the past, there had been a huge list of officials who had not played the game at the highest level, but had contributed to a particular sport in a big way. No one would dispute the contribution that Gamini Dissanayake made to cricket. He did all that while being the President of the Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka. Then Ana Punchihewa… the role he played in the ICC cricket World Cup win in 1996 is still spoken about.
“There had been cricket administrators in Sri Lanka in the calibre of Robert Senanayake, Dr. N.M. Perera, T.B. Werapitiya – the list is long and illustrious. Then in boxing, Dian Gomes – the huge contribution that he has made for that sport is a classic example. These sports administrators had not played the game at international level or first class, but no one can take their contribution to the particular game lightly.
“Right now we have over 65 sports active in this country that comes under the purview of the Sports Ministry. But how could people fill in the slots for all those sports with people who have played the game at first class or international level. There are some small sports that await the patronage of prominent personnel to prop the game up and only with such support that particular game’s survival is depended upon. If this situation is permitted to grow into a full scale epidemic, so many games would stand to suffer.
“As a result of the amendments, the repercussions will not be immediate, but, gradually. When people find that there is a dearth of talent in the administration and outsiders who are keen to help but are kept away as a result of this draconian law, then the people would begin to take notice. In short we will not be able to find proper administrators”.
He pointed out games like Volleyball, Elle, Badminton, Chess and Hockey may be some of the sports that would be impacted by this situation. But, curiously, this situation must be prevalent only in Sri Lanka. He said, “Most of these sports run through the funds that have been allocated to the Ministry of Sports, but, if there is a dearth of proper administrators as a direct result of this situation, it would be a sorry state of affairs and former Minister Dayasiri Jayasekera is responsible for this. He has taken out this clause without any valid reason.
“If we take the ICC, there is no clause to say that an official should have played the game to be a part of that organisation. It is the same with FIFA, the IRB and the NOC. We feel this is a sinister move made by the then Sports Minister to keep away some individuals from the administration, so that some other administrator would feel secure.
“We feel that the sooner this regulation is repealed and brought back the former system where the Minister could give his consent to a non-sportsman to hold office in a sports body, the better it would be for the survival of a lot of sports in this country”.