Conflict of Interest: The pesky clause that keeps troubling Indian cricketers

Image: Instagram/virat.kohli

One phrase - conflict of interest - and one name - Sanjeev Gupta – have likely forced Indian cricketers to sometimes pull their hair in frustration. Just the type of stickler David who the Goliaths despise, Gupta has filed several conflict of interest complaints against some of India’s cricketing icons in the last few years.

Gupta’s most recent charge, made in July 2020, was against Virat Kohli, the current Indian captain. It contested that Kohli held positions in two Indian companies at the same time, which was not permitted by the rules.

In his mail to BCCI Ethics Officer DK Jain, Gupta wrote, "Virat Kohli is occupying two posts at a time in blatant violation to BCCI Rule 38(4) approved by Supreme Court Of India, As such, he must relinquish his one post at once in compliance, his two posts are covered as under - A - 38(4)(a) - Player. B - 38(4)( o ) - Contractual Entity, to be read with BCCI Rule 38(1) (iii).”

According to the complaint, Kohli’s two posts were at Virat Kohli Sports LLP company, where he was Director/Owner with Amit Arun Sajdeh, and at Cornerstone Venture Partners LLP, where, too, Kohli was one of the Directors.

At the time, the complaints were brushed off as petty technicalities. As it is, there is a view in Indian cricket that BCCI rules prohibiting Indian players or coaching staff from holding two positions at a time in India is unreasonable.

But on December 5, The Indian Express revealed a conflict of interest by Kohli that cannot be waved off as frivolous. The Express unearthed that Kohli was an investor in online gaming platform MPL (Mobile Premier League), whose division MPL Sports became the kit sponsor and official merchandise partner for the Indian cricket team in November 2020.

A BCCI official is quoted as saying in the report, “We cannot be expected to track investments of players.”

This is the wrong way of looking at things. The BCCI need not keep a watch on players’ investments. But when they are getting into a deal with a company, surely they can do their due diligence and check if the company has on board anyone in Indian cricket with an existing relationship with the Board.

The onus is also on Kohli or his managers to disclose such a relationship to the Board. He is not merely a brand ambassador for MPL. He holds a stake in the company. This is not a trivial technicality of the Sanjeev Gupta variety.

Earlier, Gupta, a former member of the Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association, filed conflict of interest complaints against Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman for having roles in IPL franchises despite being on the BCCI’s Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC). Ganguly was also the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) president at the time. The CAC was dissolved, and Gupta’s complaint was deemed “infructuous”, or pointless, in simple English.

Prior to that, the Supreme Court had noted a Conflict of Interest at Chennai Super Kings after the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal. Gurunath Meiyappan, the son-in-law of then BCCI president and team owner N Srinivasan, was the Team Principal. The Supreme Court investigation into the scandal revealed Meiyappan had links with bookies. He was banned from all cricketing activities.

Many prominent sports bodies or individuals find themselves in Conflict of Interest situations. Former Fifa president Sepp Blatter’s unofficial payment of nearly $2 million to his then colleague and French legend Michel Platini in 2011 was deemed as a conflict of interest, among other offences, by the Fifa Ethics Committee. It led to lengthy bans on both.

Even the otherwise squeaky clean Roger Federer has been accused of having a conflict of interest relationship with Tennis Australia and its CEO Craig Tiley. Tennis Australia is a partner in the Laver Cup, an event promoted by Federer. This has raised suspicions that Federer gets preferential schedules at the Australian Open.

The nature of sports is such that its personalities, who have relatively short and travel-intensive careers, will build multiple commercial and professional bridges. Minor oversights from them about intricate administrative matters can be understood, but not major ones like Kohli’s.