As the official end of his tenure approaches, Zaka Ashraf, the Chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board, has faced allegations of “blatant misconduct and unconstitutional actions” from a member of his own management committee.
The administration under Ashraf’s leadership, which has lasted for four months, is set to conclude on November 5, by the week’s end.
There is no guarantee of its conclusion, as reports from the management committee members suggest that concerns and dissatisfaction with Ashraf’s leadership are currently at their highest levels, both within and outside the administration.
Zulfiqar Malik, a member of the management committee, leveled the accusations by sending an email to both Ashraf and the rest of the management committee.
In his email, Zulfiqar Malik has accused Ashraf and the administration of:
- Failing its legal, prescribed mandate, which was to manage only 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, which is a prerequisite for becoming a PCB chairman
- Allowing his son Chaudhry Khan Mohammad to meddle informally 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, “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 MC, 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 MC. Malik provides several instances of the board’s appointments as evidence of these violations.
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 seven days later, 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.
