If there is anything that Pakistan has an edge over other countries, is the ability to draft constitutions left, right and center; for the country as well as the organizations functioning within it! This is a record that will surely remain unbeaten.
So there we have it, a new constitution for the Pakistan Cricket Board that was recently framed by Justice Karamat Bhandhari and presented to the members of the ad-hoc committee, which promptly found some faults in it and returned it for some ‘editorial adjustments’, as we have been told.
After these are carried out, it shall be sent to the Patron of PCB, who is none other than the President of the country, who will, because he has already settled all other matters of national importance, will study it in-depth and approve it, paving way for its implementation, which will result in the revival of the game’s fortunes!
Sounds good doesn’t it? But what a waste of time for those people who went clambering to the relevant cricket books to check out the cricketing credentials of the ‘writers’ of the constitution, including Justice Bhandari and his ‘commission’ members. They must surely have been disappointed to find their names and credentials missing from the list of players, officials, administrators etc. who have had anything to do with running the game in Pakistan.
Is there a thought here that a ‘fresh’ approach is needed by asking people who have had nothing to do with the game in the past to inject their thoughts into its running? That seems to be the only plausible explanation of entrusting the important decision making in the hands of people who have never really been the stake holders in cricket.
And what of the stakeholders? Where do they come in? Does a fresh start indicate their relegation to oblivion? Why were they not made a part of the entire process? In fact, why did the process have to be initiated in the first place. Just because the constitution was held in abeyance, it did not mean that it had to be obliterated and a new one framed.
The constitution, being a man-made document, is never perfect, or perpetual; hence the provision of amendments. Then again, those whom it is implemented upon have a say in its framework, as well as functioning, and hence they are the ones who have to bring in the amendments, keeping pace with the changing needs of the times.
The cricket structure of Pakistan has undergone many changes, evolutionary as well as revolutionary. Complaints about the system have been many and varied, but over the years, many things have jelled and the Pakistan team, that is the product of this very system, has been able to make a name for itself and became a force to be reckoned with.
Not only that, the organizational capacity developed to assist the game’s development at the domestic level, albeit in a far from perfect manner, and was also acknowledged at the international level, resulting in the country playing host to the prestigious tournaments like the World Cup, not once but twice.
This means that we must surely have been doing something right. Instead of building on that, and strengthening the process by removing the shortcomings at the domestic level, we went back to square one by coming up against the old malaise of ad hocism! All those who had been giving their blood, sweat and tears for the game at various levels of the game’s structure were sidelined and the decision making power was again concentrated in the hands of a few.
The forums of the PCB Council and General Body, where views were aired, discussed robustly, even heatedly, and then agreed to were rendered useless. But we must remember that for all their shortcomings, the people who made up both these bodies represented the game from the grass roots’ level. They were aware of the pitfalls, the problems with the infrastructure, could put their finger on the type of players that needed grooming.
They made the bottom tier of the organizational pyramid which sent up the signals to the central body of higher management about what the game needed. They were supposed to then provide the vision, logistics and the resources to take the game forward. Instead, a top down approach has been adopted wherein an insular body of people is seen taking decisions that should be best left to the people running the show at the grounds.
So we come back to the question — what was the need for a new constitution? Granted that the ‘commission’ had held meetings with players and organizers and elicited their opinions through a questionnaire, but why so much misdirected activity and waste of the PCB’s time and resources?
The Council and General Body should have been convened if some drastic changes to the constitutions had seemed imperative, then all the stakeholders should have been involved in their drafting and a decision taken after reaching a consensus or invoking the provision of a two-third’s majority.
Even now, as the new document has done the rounds of the ad hoc committee which has pointed out some ‘technical’ flaws in it, it should be circulated to the associations and organizations, players and members of the media, be made available on the Internet to make it accessible to people who have had something to do with the game’s organization at various levels to elicit their views.
It stands to reason that if members of the ad hoc committee, most of whom are at best ‘non-technical’ people as far as the game is concerned, can find technical flaws with the document, then those who have been associated with the game of cricket in various capacities, will surely find plenty to say about what has been termed as yet another NEW constitution of the Pakistan Cricket Board. It will be interesting to see how much it differs from the existing document in letter and in spirit, and how it envisages to change the fortunes of the game in the country.
If there is anything that Pakistan has an edge over other countries, is the ability to draft constitutions left, right and center; for the country as well as the organizations functioning within it! This is a record that will surely remain unbeaten.
