ESPNCricinfo has reported that Mohammad Amir will appeal to the Court of Arbitration in Sport against the five-year ban imposed on him by an independent tribunal. “The sanction was the minimum prescribed under the code and Amir’s lawyer Shahid Karim said the tribunal, had its hands not been tied by the code, could have gone below five years. It’s a point echoed by Yasin Patel, Salman Butt’s lawyer, and could be a crucial part of any appeal.” (See http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan/content/current/story/499665.html).
It appears that the lawyers of both Amir and Butt are clinging on to the following statement of Beloff i.e “The Tribunal has recommended to the ICC certain changes to the Code with a view to providing flexibility in relation to minimum sentences in exceptional circumstances.“
Beloff’s statement needs to be factored in by the ICC appropriately (and reflected by way of appropriate amendments to the Anti-Corruption Code if the ICC so desires) so as to deal with similar cases in the future differently.
However, I don’t think that a mere recommendation from Beloff can serve as a basis for the Court of Arbitration for Sport to reduce the penalties. Can the CAS read down the provisions of the ICC’s Anti-Corruption Code, particularly those pertaining to the penalties prescribed for offences? If the draftspersons of the Anti-Corruption Code desired flexibility in relation to minimum sentences in exceptional circumstances, the same ought to have been provided for in the text of the Code. Furthermore, watering down the penal provisions of an anti-corruption statute may imply a softening of the stance in the fight against corruption in cricket. It may not send the right message across to the player/administrator fraternity.
More updates to follow…
About the Author:
Amrut Joshi is the Founder of Gamechanger Sports Ventures (www.gamechangerindia.com). He can be contacted at amrut@gamechangerindia.com.
Posted by Amrut Joshi 
