Ken Borland

Cricket South Africa’s Interim Board have clarified the process for the appointment of independent directors and, as long as the Members Council are still behaving like adults and have given the new MoI majority approval by 11am on Wednesday morning, what the new constitution says about the recruitment of new board members will be thoroughly explained to the public.

The Interim Board on Wednesday morning disputed suggestions published by The Citizen that they have any knowledge of who the applicants to be independent directors are and that they play any role in drawing up a shortlist for the Nominations Committee.

“The Interim Board does not know who has applied and will not be involved in the nominations process other than recruiting one former CSA president to serve on the Nominations Committee. All the applications are under lock and key in the office and will be passed on directly from the office to the Nominations Committee as soon as they are in place,” Interim Board spokeswoman Judith February told The Citizen.

The Interim Board hope to make the whole Memorandum of Incorporation public once the Special Resolution accepting it has been confirmed and will hold a briefing to take the media through the process thereafter.

The Nominations Committee also needs to be put in place later this week and that six-member panel will comprise 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 Interim Board is certainly not going to be appointing the new board and according to our agreement with the sports minister, nobody from the Interim Board is going to be standing for the new board,” February added.

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.