CIC: BCCI Outside RTI Act Ambit

CIC Rules BCCI Outside Ambit Of RTI Act

Why in the News ?

The Central Information Commission has ruled that the Board of Control for Cricket in India is not a “public authority” under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and therefore cannot be compelled to disclose information under the law.

Why CIC Says BCCI Not Under RTI Act

CIC Decision and Legal Reasoning

  • The CIC dismissed an appeal seeking information from the BCCI regarding player selection, government support, and administrative control.
  • The Commission held that BCCI does not qualify as a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
  • It observed that BCCI is a private body registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, and not created by the Constitution or any parliamentary law.
  • The CIC stated that mere registration under a statute does not automatically make an organisation a public authority.
  • The ruling also noted that the government neither controls BCCI’s internal functioning nor appoints its office-bearers.

Issues of Funding and Government Control

  • Petitioners argued that BCCI benefits from public resources such as police protection and government-owned stadiums.
  • However, the CIC clarified that these facilities do not amount to “substantial financing” by the government.
  • The Commission highlighted that the BCCI generates its own revenue through broadcasting rights, sponsorships, and cricket operations.
  • Reference was made to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, where BCCI was held not to be a “State” under Article 12.
  • Earlier recommendations by the Lodha Committee and the Law Commission to bring sports bodies under RTI have not yet become binding law.

About RTI Act and Public Authority:

●  The Right to Information Act, 2005 empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities to promote transparency and accountability.

●  Under Section 2(h), a public authority includes bodies established by the Constitution, laws of Parliament, state legislatures, or substantially financed by the government.

●  Article 12 of the Constitution defines “State” for the purpose of enforcing Fundamental Rights.

●  Courts have expanded the interpretation of Article 12 through judicial decisions, especially for bodies performing public functions.

●  Transparency in sports governance remains a debated issue due to the increasing commercial and public significance of sports organisations in India.