Ken Borland

While a majority independent board and an independent chair have been the most well-publicised aspects of the new Cricket South Africa constitution eventually agreed to by the Members Council, the process by which independent directors are appointed is another vital pillar of the new MoI … and it is now raising concerns among stakeholders in the game.

The MoI puts into place a Nominations Committee which will be a six-person panel comprising either a men’s or women’s former international player nominated by SACA, alongside a former CSA president nominated by the Interim Board, a Members Council representative and people from the Institute of Chartered Accountants, Institute of Directors and the Legal Practice Council.

The only problem with the Nominations Committee is that their word is final and the non-independent directors, or anyone else, are not allowed to object to the names they come up with.

The dangers of that clause are brought into focus by the first board that will serve under the new MoI. Because the Nominations Committee will only exist after the new constitution is formally adopted on Wednesday, they will be picking from a list that the Interim Board have seemingly put together from the applicants who put themselves forward before the cut-off date for applications, which was in February.

It is hardly an independent process because nobody knows who applies and who handled the applications, apart from the Interim Board.

Given the schisms in South African cricket that are obviously still present even though they will ‘officially’ be signed away on Wednesday, there is still an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty out there, and that has led to all manner of speculation and rumour about who CSA’s new directors will be.

The return of Norman Arendse, president of CSA from 2007 to 2008 and a controversial figure because of his continued interference in the selection of the national team, has been mooted, while some administrators have warned of a new wave of cadre deployment as they fear Minister of Sport Nathi Mthethwa wants to drive the ANC agenda in cricket.

Other administrators have called for the institution of an independent administrative office to handle applications for independent director posts, which would then pass them on to the Nominations Committee, with independent auditors exercising oversight through the whole process.

The process of appointing independent directors has the potential to be the new battleground of South African cricket.

The provincial presidents on the Members Council who are in favour of the proposed changes to the governance of Cricket South Africa seem to be taking responsibility for solving the impasse with the Interim Board and Minister of Sport Nathi Mthethwa as six of the unions have now issued statements supporting a majority independent board and an independent chairperson.

It may still be a case of too little, too late though as Mthethwa mulls what action to take under Section 13 (5) of the Sports Act against CSA for missing their deadline to approve a new constitution ahead of an AGM.

On Wednesday, the Northerns and Mpumalanga cricket unions issued statements supporting the stance of Central Gauteng, North-West, Easterns and Free State that there should be a majority independent board and independent chairperson.

The two Highveld unions also called for all stakeholders to take part in a national indaba, steered by an independent mediator, to resolve the impasse as quickly as possible.

But in his letter to the Members Council on Tuesday night telling them he would be taking action against them according to the provisions of the Sports Act, Mthethwa said “your proposal to convene a multi-party stakeholder conference to deal with a matter that you have been seized with for a number of months, does not make sense to me.”

Because Mthethwa has the authority to no longer recognise CSA, it would mean South Africa could go back to the days of isolation and not have an official national team.

As the sports minister told a radio station on Tuesday night, if things continue the way they are, the world will have to be told there is no cricket in South Africa.

Cricket South Africa sadly faces suspension by the Minister of Sport after Nathi Mthethwa rejected the Members Council’s plea for a seven-day extension to sort out their impasse with the Interim Board over the introduction of a majority independent board and independent chairperson.

Having given the Members Council until 5pm on Tuesday to show cause as to why he should not take action against them following their weekend failure to approve the Interim Board’s governance proposals, Mthethwa informed the provincial presidents on Tuesday night that he considered their response “to fall short of addressing the subject of showing cause why I should not apply the provisions of Section 13 (5) of the Sports Act based on your failure to implement a critical aspect of the mandate I gave the Interim Board”, according to a letter which The Citizen has seen.

The Sports Act allows for Mthethwa to withdraw government recognition of CSA, which would prevent them from participating in international cricket, thus surely leading to their suspension from the International Cricket Council and dooming the local game to amateur status.

There is clearly a massive gorge in opinion between what most observers believe are the minister’s powers and what the Members Council are banking on, because Mthethwa mentions “a lack of alignment with my interpretation of the powers provided to me by the Sports Act”.

Mthethwa points out that in his meeting with the Members Council and the Interim Board 10 days ago, there was agreement on the desirability of a majority independent board. He also mentions a letter the Members Council sent to the Interim Board saying the only remaining item for discussion was the definition of non-independent directors.

“Your proposal to convene a multi-party stakeholder conference to deal with a matter that you have been seized with for a number of months does not make sense to me. … I do not understand what would be achieved by a further seven-day extension when you were part of a conference that announced a roadmap that targeted April 17 as a completion date,” Mthethwa said.

The gorgeous irony is that several provinces are now rallying behind the lead of Gauteng and North-West, who called on the Members Council to approve the new constitution. But it is too little, too late.

In what the Ministry of Sports, Arts and Culture has described as “an extraordinary demonstration of patience”, Minister Nathi Mthethwa on Tuesday agreed to give the warring factions in Cricket South Africa another week in which to sort out their differences and adopt a new Memorandum of Incorporation for the new Board that is meant to be installed after the AGM on April 17.

The Interim Board have proposed a new MoI which seeks to rectify the poor governance in cricket by having a board with a majority of independent directors, as well as an independent chair. But the Members Council, made up of the provincial presidents, has refused to accept this and the impasse has grown uglier by the day.

Mthethwa, who put the Interim Board in place in October last year, met with the two parties on Tuesday night and his department then issued a follow-up statement on Wednesday morning that would have left no-one in doubt as to who the sports minister is backing.

The statement said: “In an extraordinary demonstration of patience, Minister Mthethwa said, ‘it is important not to allow boardroom disputes to trump player welfare. I am being dared to take executive action. In my opinion, it is clear that the court of public opinion shows no appetite for any unnecessary delays and own-goals, especially at a time when sponsors have demonstrated unbelievable loyalty and patience.

“Despite clarification on some misinterpretations and being provided with cricket best practice elsewhere in the world, the Members Council still clung to the 2013 CSA stance of ‘cricket needing to be run by cricket people’. Amongst the points of clarification were the fact that ‘independent’ does not necessarily translate to ‘cricket illiteracy’.”

In an environment that currently features as much intrigue as in a Sydney Sheldon novel, the Members Council are still deeply suspicious of having a majority of independent directors, but it was pointed out to them that a majority could mean as little as 51%.