zimcricketnews.com

There have been plenty of column inches devoted to Zimbabwe Cricket over the weekend, with both sides of the debate taking the opportunity to lay out their positions ahead of the ICC board meeting at which Zimbabwe's immediate future will be decided.

ZC Chairman Peter Chingoka has already written to the other boards with a vote in the matter, while MD Ozias Bvute has been doing the media rounds, again pointing out during an interview with the BBC that the ICC are the only world governing body who are considering action against Zimbabwe:

"[Zimbabwe] are a full member of FIFA and are currently participating in a World Cup qualifying campaign; we have a swimming programme which has produced Kirsty Coventry, a recent winner in the world championships. So it would be strange that the only sport to take action on so-called current worries is cricket when all the other world sporting bodies have not taken that stance."

It has also been pointed out that the ICC's rules may not allow action to be taken at this point, at least as far as stripping Zimbabwe of Full Member status is concerned - in an article in The Herald, Chingoka referred to a clause requiring that full membership can only cease upon the "requisite resolution being passed at conference following a proposal notified in writing to the chief executive prior to 31st December in any year for consideration at Conference in the immediately following year." The text of two letters from Chingoka to ICC President Ray Mali is below the cut, and let's just say that they're a robust defence of Zimbabwe's position. It's just a shame that the Herald presents the issue as another dastardly plot by the English to cause problems for their former colony.

At the moment it's expected that England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and West Indies will support sanctions; Zimbabwe, India and Pakistan have indicated they will vote against - although perhaps interestingly, Australia are refusing to be drawn on their position, with Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young, speaking to The Zimbabwe Independent, being rather cryptic in his response:

"Cricket Australia is observing the situation in Zimbabwe with great concern. Cricket Australia has many friends in Zimbabwe and has undertaken a range of steps to try to help cricket within Zimbabwe during the difficult times in your country during recent years."

"We saw and noted the South African statement. I think it is likely that our next step will be to understand the views of the broader world cricket community at global meetings which, by chance, are due to start at the end of this week before considering any public comment."

Not exactly a stinging rebuke, that - although I would still expect the Australian board to follow their government's hard line on the issue. The UK Government has also been laying out the reasoning behind their decision to band Zimbabwe's bilateral tour of England, and amongst other things Andy Burnham, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, cites the perceived closeness of the ZC board to the Mugabe Government:

"One of the facts that weighed in my mind was you do have to consider the closeness of the cricket authorities in Zimbabwe with the Mugabe regime, that is a very important factor."

Put that allegation to ZC, though, and you get a blank wall. The Zimbabwe Standard tried just that, and ZC media manager Lovemore Banda refused to be drawn:

"You cannot prove that. It does not help us to make a denial. People expect us to say that."

Which is a fair point. But after all the talking is done, it looks likely that this issue of sanctions will be divided by the votes of Sri Lanka and Bangladesh - and with them both being supportive of the BCCI line on most issues, that should be enough to see Zimbabwe live to fight another day.
BBC Sport - Zimbabwe cricket boss queries ban
The Herald - ZC questions ICC decision
Zimbabwe Independent - Zim Cricket Caught In Political Trouble
Zimbabwe Standard - ZC Faces Hangman's Noose
Cricket365 - Burnham Outlines ZC`s Links With Mugabe

First letter from ZC Chairman Peter Chigoka to ICC President Ray Mali

In your letter of the 23rd of June 2008, you expressed a personal opinion on "the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe," vis-à-vis the — I quote — "absence of free and fair elections."

The (ZC) Board therefore wonders whether the ICC is giving the whole situation a fair hearing.

We hold no brief for the participating political parties and ZC is apolitical as you well know. Therefore to condemn ZC for acts — proven or unproven — of third parties, is, to say the least, a negation of the rules of natural justice.

In short, there is no nexus between politics and the game of cricket or any other sport for that matter.

You will recall that last year in London, a decision was taken and well-supported by you, Mr President, and other members that sport and politics, like oil and water, do not mix.

The minutes of that June 2007 meeting show that the President of Cricket South Africa pointed out that the ICC and its membership are not competent to make political judgments and the BCCI’s Mr Bindra strengthened this position by saying sporting sanctions can only be initiated by the UN. Be that as it may, before placing the item on the agenda, we wonder whether careful consideration has been taken on the constitutional provisions of the ICC.

We have looked at the Articles of Association, more particularly Clauses 2.6, 2.7 and 2.8 on page 19 of the ICC Executive Board of Directors Manual.

Nothing under Cessation of Membership (Clause 2.7) and Status of Members (Clause 2.8) is in any way connected to the item now being placed on the agenda; to wit, the status of Zimbabwe Cricket vis-à-vis the so-called "absence of free and fair elections in Zimbabwe."

In any case, nothing in the ICC’s Constitution points to the legitimacy of putting that item on the agenda, as no provision exists in the ICC Constitution warranting such an action. If one looks at Clause 2-6 (b) where it says, "Membership of the Council shall cease:

(b) upon the requisite resolution being passed at Conference following a proposal notified in writing to the Chief Executive prior to 31st December in any year for consideration at Conference in the immediately following year, such proposal being made and seconded by Full Members;"

Such a clause does not again warrant the putting of the status of ZC on the agenda from its clear reading on the following reasons:

- that the proposal being raised is not an issue in cricket;

- that even if it were, which is denied, it can only be discussed next year in June 2009, after being raised this year; and

- that the ICC executive board cannot discuss such an item from an uninformed position vis-à-vis whether the environment existing in Zimbabwe makes the playing of cricket difficult at any level.

The rules of natural justice, equity and good conscience demand that a fair hearing would need to be given to Zimbabwe Cricket and that would entail the ICC sending a fact-finding mission to Zimbabwe if at all it is warranted from a cricket point of view.

It is the ZC Board’s view that in the present circumstances, it is not warranted.

To make it even abundantly clear, cricket in Zimbabwe is just but one sport. Various other disciplines are playing international games towards major international events like the football World Cup, the Olympics in China, swimming, tennis etc and no such discussion as being championed by the ICC has been placed on the agendas of the international bodies of such sporting disciplines.

In fact, only three days ago Zimbabwe hosted a 2010 FIFA World Cup/African Cup of Nations qualifying match against Kenya, in our capital, Harare.

There are over 100 ICC member countries with differing political environments. Without venturing to mention names, as it is apparent, it is clear that certain worse conditions exist in those other member countries.

It has not warranted the ICC putting them on its agenda as it is doing with Zimbabwe right now.

It is important not to be seen to be setting double standards and discriminatory levels that go against the ICC Anti-racism Code.

. . . Conclusively, therefore, the status of ZC as an ICC Member does not warrant discussion whatsoever based on a far-fetched reason which the game of cricket never anticipated and/or envisaged would be material for discussion at any stage," wrote Chingoka.

Follow-up letter dated 27th June from Peter Chingoka

. . . We would have thought that you would have amplified our discussion of 25th instant for other Executive Board Directors.

This would have made it easy for all concerned to appreciate the background of how you came to urgently make the case of ZC an additional agenda item to an already finalized agenda in the next Dubai meeting of the 2nd of July 2008, with a week’s notice unless consultations with certain member countries had already taken place behind our back.

We would not like to think so though, with due respect.

We remain adamant that ZC should not even be an agenda item. At best you would have, possibly outside the Board meeting, asked Zimbabwe on the situation in the country before rushing to act as you did.

To even allow the holding of an international press conference in London of the only lately added agenda item before its discussion or verification of the facts is, to say the least, unethical. What it meant is that ZC has been condemned unheard, again a negation of the audi alteram partem rule.

It seems as though Zimbabwe has been used as a beach ball on two recent occasions, to wit:

i) The recent press announcement of the Malcolm Speed issue where Zimbabwe was clearly used as scapegoat.

ii) The present case where the President-elect announced to the press an agenda item which is still to be discussed.

We are surprised to whose political gallery these antics are being supposed to appease.

This added agenda item is infested with political connotations. I am therefore extremely uncomfortable as I already pointed out to you in our telephone conversation of the 25th instant to deal with a non-cricket matter on my own.

In this regard, it is only fair and equitable that my Vice-Chairman and my Chairman of the Legal and Constitutional Committee accompany me into the Executive Board meeting for discussion of this agenda item, obviously without a vote.