CRICKET in South Asia is nothing less than euphoria, zeal and bliss. Owing to the huge public involvement in the game, issues related to the sport get immediate attention from the masses and media.

Courts too consider cases involving cricket as matters of great public interest.

Being an enthusiastic fan of the game, like many others, I would love to see the game flourishing in Pakistan and to watch live matches in the stadiums again.

For this, it would be desirable to have an efficient and vibrant body consisting of thorough professionals who could help and assist Pakistan cricket by ensuring the up-to-the mark management of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB).

Unfortunately, in contrast to such a wish, the painful sight is that of a PCB working in absolutely peculiar conditions. The game was already suffering after the attack on the visiting Sri Lankan cricket team some years ago. Pakistan had become an outcast of sorts.

The government, keen to bring international cricket back to Pakistan, was trying to bring in a new management to handle PCB affairs when recent judicial intervention in the administrative affairs of the cricket board, left the latter, in my opinion, virtually paralysed.

Without going into the merits of a pending appeal against the judgement rendered by a single-member bench of the Islamabad High Court, it is more appropriate to discuss the practical implications of the verdict on the affairs of the cricket board.

It may not be wrong to suggest that after the verdict, the entire working of the PCB is being carried out in a vacuum. The board is without a fully fledged chairman who could be held accountable for any misdeed.

An individual who should have been in the post of an acting chairman has been given the status of a ‘caretaker chairman’ for 90 days to look after the routine affairs of the board. But, at the same time, he has been restricted from making or terminating any appointments or taking any major decisions.

The appointment of the caretaker chairman of the PCB does not find mention under any relevant law.

In this case, the endeavour of the honourable court seems somewhat contrary to the conservative judicial approach where the judiciary spells out the criteria and standards for appointments, postings etc but always exercises restraint. That is, the courts leave these affairs to the executive and allow appointments following the principles laid down in the judgement.

To further add to the existing state of affairs, in the absence of the details in the judgement it might become very difficult to determine the difference between the nature of major and minor decisions.

The judgement directs the caretaker chairman to hold fair and transparent elections to the post of the chairman of the PCB within 90 days which cannot be extended under any circumstances.

While some in sporting circles laud the action, it is nevertheless interesting to observe that it has been deemed appropriate to nullify the part of the PCB’s constitution dealing with the appointment of the chairman through an elected board of governors consisting of five members who are elected regional presidents. They are elected by presidents (also elected) of district cricket associations.

On its part, the court has deemed it suitable to order the holding of the election to the post of chairman and it has defined an electoral college consisting of regional presidents, presidents of district associations and nominees of the department playing first-class cricket.

The law itself is silent on the election of the chairman through the manner prescribed by the honourable court.

Under the circumstances, it appears that, after the nullification of the sections related to the elections of the chairman, the patron-in-chief of PCB (the president of Pakistan) has been given complete powers to nominate the PCB chairman on the advice of the prime minister of Pakistan.

Seen in this light, the International Cricket Council may not approve of this act and consider it the government’s interference in the affairs of the game.

According to the judgement, the cricket regions are a vital component of the election process as they have to elect their presidents to elect the chairman. But the practical impediments in holding elections are those challenges that have been thrown to the elections of these sports bodies in the courts.

Reportedly, almost 20 district associations have challenged their internal elections on different grounds and the cases are still pending adjudication before different courts, and the elections of two main regions, Lahore and Karachi, to elect their respective presidents, are yet to take place.

Whether or not the elections of the PCB chairman can take place with an incomplete electoral college is a separate legal question that may find its answer if the election of chairman is challenged as being contrary to the law.

The court directed the Election Commission of Pakistan to hold the first ever election of the chairman PCB. The ECP is an independent constitutional body which derives its mandate from the Constitution of Pakistan 1973.

Under the Constitution, the ECP has the mandate to hold elections of the constitutional offices including the national and provincial assemblies, the Senate, the president of Pakistan etc but not to conduct polls of any sports body. The ECP reportedly has shown its inability to hold elections as these are outside its constitutional mandate.

I believe that this intervention clashes with what is the domain of the legislature. The courts have all the power and right to provide guidelines and to lay down the principles to harmonise the process of legislation in accordance with the Constitution and the law. But the right to legislate rests entirely with the legislature.

The government must bring an immediate and effective piece of legislation to bring about a vibrant management in the PCB in accordance with the requirements of the International Cricket Council and to save the game from further deterioration.

The writer is a lawyer.

Twitter: @faisal_fareed