There was a shrill chorus for Pawan Bansal's scalp despite the absence of any tangible proof that his nephew was sharing his loot with his uncle. When the Congress didn't remove Ashwini Kumar immediately, it was accused of trying to 'brazen' it out.
The Opposition has time and again asked for the Prime Minister's resignation on grounds that he has been a mute spectator to acts of omission and commission by Cabinet colleagues (no one has ever accused him of personal corruption). Parliament has been paralysed for virtually entire sessions in protest against the government's failure to act.
And yet, these same people - many of whom are otherwise vociferously articulate -- have united with their political opponents in remaining deafeningly silent while BCCI boss N Srinivasan has brazened out allegations of betting and match fixing by his son-in-law and Chennai Super Kings team principal Gurunath Meiyappan.
Among the 30 men who constitute the board that runs Indian cricket are Arun Jaitley (vice president of BCCI), Narendra Modi, Rajeev Shukla (IPL commissioner), Jyotiraditya Scindia, CP Joshi and Farooq Abdullah. If what Srinivasan said at his press conference on Sunday is true, he has their unanimous support. And if it isn't, no one's come forward to dispute his claim.
In private, several of these worthies claim they have indicated to N Srinivasan that he should quit following his son-in-law's arrest, but he has single-handedly defied them all. They say the BCCI's rules are such that it's virtually impossible to force the president out, but fact is, not one of them has had the guts to speak out (beyond mouthing platitudes), or apply any pressure worth speaking of.
Have they considered resigning on grounds that they cannot be party to what's happening? Are they not aware of the public outrage against the sleaze that has entered the game? Or do they not care? The answer to all these questions appears to be a resounding 'no'.
Is Srinivasan really too powerful for all of these people put together? Or, is the BCCI just a cozy multi-partisan private club whose membership is too prized for them to be principled enough to give it up? Maybe they just don't want to rock a boat they feel will be under their stewardship one day.
0 comments:
Post a Comment