Should the ICC handle serious charges which fall under Civil/Criminal Law?

[harishankar]

It is my belief that the ICC does not have the right or the jurisdiction to convict or clear players of serious charges even if it has happened on the cricket field. Especially things like racism charges because they are way too serious and can ruin somebody's life and career beyond repair.

I think the Law of the Land and the Civil/Criminal Courts should handle racism charges particularly because of the seriousness of the charge.

The ICC is a cricket governing body and does not have the necessary authority to convict players of such serious charges. It can represent/act either for prosecution or defence but I don't think that match referees should be given such god-like powers which can ruin a man's life and reputation.

I can understand punishing indiscipline on the field of play etc. but because of the serious nature of racism and the political fallout of such situations, the ICC should not be given the power to hold "hearings" on such offences.

if anything, if there is real proof of such things, the players concerned must approach a court of law where the laws of evidence and proof will prevail. The evidence must be sufficiently convincing to convict, so that every care has been taken to ensure that no innocent man is found guilty.

This will ensure that nobody's name is tarnished without actually going through the procedure of law.

What do you feel?

 

[iloveireland]

It does in certain situations. Like racism for instance should be settled by the ICC. Things like murder and serious crimes shouldnt be done by the ICC

 

[harishankar]

It does in certain situations. Like racism for instance should be settled by the ICC. Things like murder and serious crimes shouldnt be done by the ICC

My point is that the fallout of racism is far beyond the cricket field. So a cricket governing body should not have the authority and indeed does not have the authority to do so.

It would be interesting if somebody filed a court case against the ICC's power to find players guilty or not of things which fall under the Civil/Criminal law of the country.

 

[SciD]

ICC can conduct its querry into the matter and can take whatever action it wants to take. Its upto the player to then go and challenge the verdict in Civil court. Just like what Darryl Hair did.
TBH the current case will be dismissed in 5 minutes in any civil court.

 

[harishankar]

ICC can conduct its querry into the matter and can take whatever action it wants to take. Its upto the player to then go and challenge the verdict in Civil court. Just like what Darryl Hair did.
TBH the current case will be dismissed in 5 minutes in any civil court.

But isn't that in conflict with the rule of Law? Does the ICC has the power of a court to be involved in disputes which are serious and come under Civil or Criminal law of a country.

In other words, it's one thing for the ICC to punish indiscipline because indiscipline is technically not a crime and of course it comes within the cricketing authority's power. But racial abuse is a crime in many countries which sometimes even carry prison sentences. Can you see the difference?

Let's just say that Harbhajan was indeed guilty. Isn't he then liable to be punished under the Law just like any other ordinary person? Or if he was not guilty isn't he bound to sue the ICC for damages for tarnishing his image?

Is it a matter where an extra-judicial authority like the ICC is usurping to power of the Courts to take decisions? Is it legally valid?

 

[iloveireland]

Punching is assault and is against the law, does Soccer do it through the courts instead, no they get penalised

 

[harishankar]

Punching is assault and is against the law, does Soccer do it through the courts instead, no they get penalised

Strictly speaking assault is a crime and it should be dealt with on the court. So I am against that as well. Just because you bring another example does not mean I agree with that example.

But even there if a player has deliberately injured another player, I believe the court should convict him of the crime. But you see, Soccer is a sport where there's bound to be a bit of physical contact...

Racism is a criminal offence in many countries carrying a prison sentence. It does far more injury to a person's character and career than assault on a football field too.

P.S. I would love a lawyer's opinion on this issue.

 

[SciD]

So whats sentence for racism in Australia?

 

[prarara]

My point is that the fallout of racism is far beyond the cricket field. So a cricket governing body should not have the authority and indeed does not have the authority to do so.

It would be interesting if somebody filed a court case against the ICC's power to find players guilty or not of things which fall under the Civil/Criminal law of the country.

Nope it's not. Racism falls under the Right to the freedom of speech (at least here in the States). Racists can assemble together under the Right to Assemble. Non Public Insitutions like ICC can hold gatherings where they can outlaw certain behaviors eg. Racism-so racist issues are dealt with within that body. Dealing with Racism as a criminal offense leads to a slippery slope where I feel such a ruling could be unfairly used to abridge the rights of speech and assembly of parties of differing political viewpoint.

Serious things like murder, sexual misconduct, etc. has ramifications in actual society so actual measures are carried out there; additionally, institutions like the ICC can add further punitive measure if they find the behavior under violation of a Law or ruling.

 

[iloveireland]

So whats sentence for racism in Australia?

A slap on the wrist and a caution. Its only a minor thing. The worst charge you could get is Verbal Assualt.

 

[jordox]

It is my belief that the ICC does not have the right or the jurisdiction to convict or clear players of serious charges even if it has happened on the cricket field. Especially things like racism charges because they are way too serious and can ruin somebody's life and career beyond repair.

I think the Law of the Land and the Civil/Criminal Courts should handle racism charges particularly because of the seriousness of the charge.

The ICC is a cricket governing body and does not have the necessary authority to convict players of such serious charges. It can represent/act either for prosecution or defence but I don't think that match referees should be given such god-like powers which can ruin a man's life and reputation.

I can understand punishing indiscipline on the field of play etc. but because of the serious nature of racism and the political fallout of such situations, the ICC should not be given the power to hold "hearings" on such offences.

if anything, if there is real proof of such things, the players concerned must approach a court of law where the laws of evidence and proof will prevail. The evidence must be sufficiently convincing to convict, so that every care has been taken to ensure that no innocent man is found guilty.

This will ensure that nobody's name is tarnished without actually going through the procedure of law.

What do you feel?

:laugh

No mate, because if I went down the street and called Symmo a monkey, nothing would happen to me. The real courts don't give a rats bottom about minor racism, it happens everyday. However, the cricketers should play under the spirit and are bound by a 'code of conduct'

 

[harishankar]

Then if it's no big deal and Harbhajan's words were so innocent, why the hell has Harbhajan been handed a 3 match suspension? The Australians went crying off to the match referee as though he committed an unpardonable sin.

What about the numerous times that Ricky Ponting has abused the Indian players and over-appealed?

Your double standards appall me... I expected more support for my point of view on this issue.

Since you all seem so hot and bothered about something which should never have left the cricket field in the first place.

 

[SciD]

Then if it's no big deal and Harbhajan's words were so innocent, why the hell has Harbhajan been handed a 3 match suspension? The Australians went crying off to the match referee as though he committed an unpardonable sin.

What about the numerous times that Ricky Ponting has abused the Indian players and over-appealed?

Your double standards appall me... I expected more support for my point of view on this issue.

Since you all seem so hot and bothered about something which should never have left the cricket field in the first place.

What did Symmo ais for Bhajji to get that mad???????

Who will answer this?? If he was so angle why did he not write this in his article?

 

[angryangy]

The captains have to report racism. They have to report anything they think breaches the code of conduct. Breaches of the code are thought to bring the game into disrepute. The ICC considers one of its key obligations to be to protect the image of the game.

 

[BONED!]

Last time I checked, racism wasn't illegal. Sure, it is not accepted by 'proper' society, but being racist is not against the law. Now if you go and physically attack someone for a racist reason, that is illegal because it is assault, not because it is racist. I'm not defending racism, I'm just pointing out that racism is not against the law. So yes, the ICC should deal with racist matters that occur on the pitch, because it's not against the law outside of the pitch.