Cricket SA and Sascoc stand their ground in face-off with minister

There appears to be no end in sight to the furore surrounding cricket after SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (Sascoc) fired a salvo at sports minister Nathi Mthethwa criticising his decision to move towards defunding and deregistering the game in the country.

In a five-page statement‚ Sascoc said it “strongly disagrees” with Mthethwa. The sports umbrella body accused Mthethwa of “selectively” applying Section 13(5) of the Sports Act and said the minister had “overreached” by doing so.

This comes a week after the Cricket SA (CSA) members council‚ which is made of up the 14 affiliates presidents‚ voted against amendments in the memorandum of incorporation (MOI) to allow for a majority independent board and an independent chairperson with no affiliation to cricket. The motion was defeated after it garnered only 46% of the votes, instead of the 75% needed.

In its letter, Sascoc called on Mthethwa to accept and respect decisions of the majority‚ and to allow further dialogues and consultations to take place. Sascoc also effectively rejected the 2012 Nicholson recommendations to allow for a majority independent board at CSA.

“Sascoc strongly disagrees with the minister’s decision to invoke Section 13 (5) (c) of the sports and Rrecreation act‚ regarding CSA. This clause relates to ‘if a national federation fails to adhere to a decision of the mediator or directive issued by the minister as referred to in paragraph (a)‚ the minister may defund‚ remove recognition and publish his/her decision in the Gazette’‚” reads the Sascoc statement. “Our considered view is that section 13 of the act needs to be read and applied in its entirety rather than selectively. Had the minister done that‚ he would have realised this instrument was not only inapplicable in this case‚ but also‚ that he has overreached.

After the first such SGM‚ the minister threatened the MC with ‘daring him to invoke Section 13 (5) (c)’ and sent them back to find what he termed ‘common ground’. It’s clear that from the onset‚ it was either his way or the highway.

—  Sascoc statement

“First‚ consideration must be given to the fact that the CSA members’ council (MC) has‚ on two legitimate special general meetings (SGMs)‚ and through a democratic process, concluded not to adopt the new MOI.

“The SGM is the correctly designated structure within the CSA statutes to make such a decision. The MC made the decision that they saw fit‚ as they are permitted to do. The point of decision centres such as SGMs‚ in any organisation‚ is for legitimate members of the organisation to have a proper say in the governance of their affairs, without undue influence or being strong-armed. The outcomes of such processes may sometimes be unpalatable‚ but such is the nature of democracy.

“After the first SGM‚ the minister threatened the MC with ‘daring him to invoke Section 13 (5) (c)’ and sent them back to find what he termed ‘common ground’. It’s clear that from the onset‚ it was either his way or the highway.

“You cannot forgo existing governance processes to impose Nicholson’s findings‚ however well-intended they maybe‚ because in doing so you fall foul of the exact same thing you are trying to rectify,” the Sascoc statement continues.

“We find it astonishing that the MC was only given one day’s notice and only furnished with the relevant documents less than 12 hours before what is a critical decision for cricket‚ the consequences of which will run far deeper than the national structures of CSA.

“We agree that the CSA governance model requires some rethink‚ and we are committed to work with our members to achieve that‚ and we believe the MC is of the same view with regards to corporate governance and transformation.

“We are all committed to the same objective‚ so we must negotiate without a gun at each other’s’ heads‚ nor be dismissive of inputs no matter how disagreeable they are to our world view. They matter particularly when they come from those most affected by it.

“The directive of the minister as referred to in section 13 of the act is that the majority of board members must be independent members and that the president of CSA must be an independent as well. The minister invokes the Nicolson report in this regard.

“Lest we forget‚ in 2012 when the Nicholson report was released‚ the Sascoc board specifically rejected recommendation 357 of the report that stated that the CSA board should consist of a majority of independent board members. The Sascoc rationale was simple‚ cricket must be governed and led by cricket people‚ with the assistance from specialist independents.

“Through discussions with the department of sport and recreation and the then-minister‚ Fikile Mbalula‚ this principle was accepted and agreed.

“Consequently‚ a new board was put in place, and this is the dispensation under which Haroon Lorgat served comfortably for a long time.

“Minister Mthethwa insists that the president of the new CSA board must be led by an independent person. Where does he derive this from‚ because judge Nicholson made no such recommendation. Which aspects of the Nicholson report have not been implemented by CSA then‚ we ask? We cannot change the rules every time we get a result we don’t like.

“We have seen recently with the erstwhile interim chair of the IB‚ judge Zak Yacoob‚ that independent chairs are no guarantee for good order and behaviour.

“SA sport and our own country’s democracy are founded on the principle of democratic governance and consultation, no matter how long and painfully slow it may be‚ and this we must live with. Minister Mthethwa demands that the CSA MC must agree to the revised MOI that specifically affects the appointment of board members‚ and if they do not adhere to his demand that he will then invoke certain sections of Section 13 (5) (c).

“Minister Mthethwa purposefully contradicts section 13 (5) (b) (ii) of the same act‚ which states: ‘The minister may not interfere in matters relating to the selection of teams‚ administration of sport and appointment of‚ termination of the service of‚ the executive members of the sport and recreation body.’ The minister is flouting his own act.

Our position on the president of federations is that such a person must also be elected through a democratic process and cannot be an appointed individual outside the sport.

—  Sascoc statement

“The final vote must be accepted by all‚ including the minister of sport‚ arts and culture‚ the person who is there to protect our democracy and our voice. The Sascoc board has requested to meet the minister on this matter, and the minister’s response to our request was that the matter was firmly in his hands and that he would meet the Sascoc board when he deems fit to do so.

“Our position on the president of federations is that such a person must also be elected through a democratic process and cannot be an appointed individual outside the sport. The bedrock of sport in SA is a democratic elective process of members deciding who will lead their sport structures from club to district‚ regional and national level.

“Once again Sascoc is committed to work with the MC‚ the current IB‚ the department of sport‚ arts and culture and the minister. We believe that we can work together within our principles of democratic elective processes and create a balance of independent specialists that will enhance governance.

“We therefore call on all parties to engage in dialogue that will culminate in an acceptable‚ balanced‚ responsible and competent structure that will take CSA forward‚” concludes the Sascoc statement.