CoA’s Split Verdict on Rahul Johri: 4 Takeaways From #MeToo Case

The final word in the Rahul Johri #MeToo case was a split verdict with Diana Edulji wanting him to resign.

Members of the probe committee submitted their findings and recommendations to the CoA on Wednesday morning. 

(Photo: BCCI/Twitter)

All the complainants and their allegations of sexual harassment against BCCI CEO Rahul Johri have not just been dismissed, but also labelled “mischievous and fabricated” by two members of the board-appointed Independent Enquiry Committee in a split verdict on Wednesday, 21 November.

The panel comprising Justice (Retd) Rakesh Sharma, former Delhi Commission of Women chairperson Barkha Singh and lawyer-activist Veena Gowda, however, were not all in agreement. While Sharma and Singh gave Johri a clean chit, even calling him "innocent”, Gowda recommended that he be made to “undergo some form of gender sensitivity counselling/training.”

Even the final verdict to let Johri back into the BCCI fold wasn't a unanimous one, with Diana Edulji recommending he be asked to resign and Vinod Rai wanting him to join office.

Rahul Johri is now back as the BCCI CEO, but the recommendations and the handling of the case by the BCCI has ruffled many feathers.

So here are five takeaways from the entire controversy, you decide for yourself:

Two Panel Members Call Complains ‘Fabricated’

Justice (Retd) Rakesh Sharma and Barkha Singh seem to be in complete agreement on their summation of the investigation.

“He appears to be innocent,” says Justice Sharma, but also adds in his recommendation that the accusers had an ulterior motive while filing the ‘manufactured’ complains.

“The allegations of sexual harassment in the office or elsewhere are false, baseless and have been fabricated and manufactured with an ulterior motive to harm Mr Rahul Johri and throw him out of BCCI.”

Justice (Retd) Rakesh Sharma

Mrs Sharma, a former Chairman of the Delhi Commission of Women, further commented on the complainants and said the false accusations of the women “will diminish the status of women and the job opportunities for them”.

“In my opinion, such kind of motivated and fabricated allegations will diminish the status of women and the job opportunities for them. Such complaints will also have an adverse effect on the fight for equality for women.”

Barkha Singh 

“No adverse action needs to be taken against Mr Rahul Johri,” was the last sentence of the recommendation made by Justice Sharma, as released by the BCCI.

Third Panel Member Says Johri Needs Counselling

The third member of the Panel, Ms Veena Gowda, differed vastly in her findings from Sharma and Singh.

Referring to an incident during a Champions Trophy match in Birmingham last year, she called Johri’s behaviour 'inappropriate’ and added that it reflects badly on the board.

“The conduct of Mr Rahul Johri at Birmingham, as a CEO of an institution such as BCCI, is unprofessional and inappropriate, which would adversely affect its reputation and the same has to be looked at by the concerned authorities.”

Veena Gowda 

So while two members of the panel questioned the complainants, calling their accusations ‘motivated’ and ‘mischievous’, Ms Gowda concluded that Johri’s behaviour needed to be worked on, or it would have an adverse affect on the BCCI’s reputation.

She also recommended that he be made to “undergo some form of gender sensitivity counselling/training.”

Edulji Wanted Johri Sacked

To start, Diana Edulji’s (Member, Committee of Administrators) requested to be given adequate time to read the full report before coming to a conclusion, but was instead made to read only the summary and submit her verdict.

After reading only the recommendations of the three panel members, Edulji was of the opinion that all three members were not in agreement and based on Ms Gowda’s statement, she wanted Johri to be asked to resign.

“She (Diana) expressed the view that the report of the Committee is actually a split 2:1 verdict and Mr Johri should be asked to tender his resignation with immediate effect.”

Extract of BCCI Report

Edulji also added that just the recommendation that Johri be asked to seek gender sensitisation counselling was sufficient for her to arrive at the conclusion that he was not fit to be the CEO of BCCI.

Pointing out that the reputation of the board was of paramount importance to her, Edulji cited Ms Gowda’s views that Johri’s unprofessional and inappropriate would adversely affect the board’s reputation.

Rai vs Edulji: CoA Remains Divided

While Diana Edulji was clear that since Johri’s behaviour did not match the standards needed to be upheld by a member of the BCCI and that he needed to resign, Committee of Administrators (CoA) chief Vinod Rai disagreed.

He stated that since even Gowda had not found Johri guilty of sexual harassment, he should be allowed back into office.

“The finding of Ms Veena Gowda in respect of Mr Johri is that his behaviour in Birmingham was unprofessional and inappropriate. However, she has not found him guilty of sexual harassment. The clear inference from this recommendation is that, going forward, Mr Johri needs to be counselled as aforesaid, but there is no recommendation to take any other action against him.”

Vinod Rai

So while the BCCI CEO’s behaviour was suspect enough to have to be sent to seek counselling, CoA boss Vinod Rai did not believe it had any effect on the case or on the reputation of the board.

Therefore, the result was another split verdict between the two remaining members of the CoA, and much like when the initial accusations had emerged and Edulji had demanded Johri be made to resign, Vinod Rai’s vote counted for more and Rahul Johri returned to office on Wednesday evening.