As the tenure of Zaka Ashraf, Chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), nears its official end, a member of his own management committee has leveled allegations of “blatant misconduct and unconstitutional actions.” The administration under Ashraf’s leadership, which has lasted for four months, is set to conclude on November 5.
However, there are concerns regarding its conclusion, as reports from the management committee members indicate that dissatisfaction with Ashraf’s leadership is at its peak, both within and outside the administration.
Zulfiqar Malik, a member of the management committee, made these accusations by sending an email to both Ashraf and the rest of the management committee. The allegations include:
- Failing to adhere to the legal, prescribed mandate, which was to manage the board’s daily affairs and not make long-term decisions.
- Ignoring directives from the IPC to hold board elections so that the interim set-up finishes, and a chairman is appointed.
- Failing to provide his degree certificate, a prerequisite for becoming a PCB chairman.
- Allowing his son to informally interfere in board matters.
- Misusing the office of the PCB election commissioner to carry out political victimization of opponents and running rigged elections in regions.
Zulfiqar Malik writes, “I have noted some flagrant misdoings and unconstitutional decisions by management that I wish to bring on record.” He added that the email is an attempt “to absolve myself from the unconstitutional decisions and wrongdoings which have taken place over the period of time without consultation or approval of most members.”
The lack of progress in board elections and the extent of this administration’s responsibilities extending beyond their everyday decision-making are the two most pressing concerns. Zulfiqar asserts that the management committee, under the leadership of Mr. Zaka Ashraf, has gone beyond its scope of managing daily operations and has made numerous decisions with long-term implications that contradict the authority granted to the committee.
The PCB responded by stating that all decisions are made in accordance with the constitution and defended the way they make decisions, emphasizing that their choices are aimed at ensuring the uninterrupted daily operations of the PCB.
The email was dispatched on October 3, and the IPC requested the PCB to furnish a thorough report concerning their activities. This report should have included information on their progress towards elections, a list of all appointments they’ve made, and details of contracts they’ve entered into. The request was marked as “Urgent,” but the PCB has yet to furnish the requested report.
The board stated that matters between IPC and PCB are internal, and PCB prefers not to provide a comment on its interactions with IPC. It is important to note that there is an ongoing and consistent exchange of communication between PCB and IPC.
