The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), ethics officer DK Jain is examining the conflict of interest issue. The complaint about the same has been filed against Indian team captain Virat Kohli.
The conflict of interest
Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association life-member, Sanjeev Gupta has levelled conflict of interest charges against Kohli. In his complaint, he has alleged that Kohli holds two posts which violate BCCI’s constitution. The two post being, captain of Team India and director of his venture Virat Kohli Sports LLP.
The co-directors of his venture are also part of Cornerstone Venture Partners LLP. Kohli is also a director at Cornerstone. Bunty Sajdeh and Binoy Khimji, the co-directors are both a part of Cornerstone Sport and Entertainment.
According to Gupta, this is not in line with BCCI’s constitution. It prevents an individual from holding multiple positions in different companies. The talent management company also has several of Virat’s teammates.
It has been learnt that Kohli does not have any role in Cornerstone Sport and Entertainment Private Limited. This company manages commercial interests of Kohli along with KL Rahul, Rishabh Pant, Ravindra Jadeja, Umesh Yadav and Kuldeep Yadav.
What the complainant has to say?
“Shri 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…,” wrote Gupta in his complaint.
The Ethics Officer, DK Jain has said that he has received a complaint. He shall examine it to see if a case needs to be made or not. If yes, then he will look into an opportunity where he gets a response from Kohli.
Jain is currently on an extension for a year as Ethics Officer. This is the first high profile case that he has received since his extension last month.
In the past, Mahendra Singh Dhoni had also faced a conflict of interest allegation. This was during the time when Dhoni was associated with Rhiti Sports Management. The complainant, Sanjeev Gupta has in the past levelled similar charges against other players. These charges were however deemed “infructuous” later.
