You are here
Cameron considers legal action
When it comes to action on the field of play the West Indies cricket team is adored across the world but it seems like the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) are jealous of that and want some attention as well, as they continue to match the players with action off the field.
With the directors due to meet and elect a president on March 27 at their annual general meeting in Barbados, bacchanal continues to the very end. Information reaching T&T Guardian is that challenger Dave Cameron is deciding whether he should sue the Barbados Cricket Association (BCA) for unfair treatment, as it pertains to his manifesto not being given a fair assessment.
Cameron, the current vice president of the WICB who has been Hunte’s deputy for the last six years, said his decision to contest the presidency was prompted by an approach from WICB shareholders after the current president told directors this would be his last term in office.
Hunte, in a statement on Thursday, refuted those claims. The St Lucian said: “I never ever informed the board that I was not going to seek re-election.” Hunte’s running mate in the election is BCA president Joel Garner and T&T Guardian understands that some of the directors of the BCA sought legal advice on their actions to second Hunte for the post.
The legal opinion came in just about two days ago, and it indicates that Cameron has a very strong case of showing that the BCA acted unfairly to him.
According to the legal expert: “In this respect, attention is drawn to the implications which may flow from BCA’s dealings to second the nomination of Julian Hunte for president in WICB elections March 27, 2013. Notwithstanding, this writing must not be taken as a legal opinion, but merely notice of where I think the Board has found itself in this matter.
“The circumstances surrounding the said dealings are highlighted below under headings: Background, Decision making process of the Board and the Conduct of the BCA President.
The key issues emerging from same are as follows:
1. Whether the invitation to candidates to submit manifestos resulted in a contract between the BCA and Dave Cameron and same was breached by the BCA?
2. Whether the BCA support to second the nomination of Julian Hunte is valid?
3. Whether the BCA President breached his duty?
(a) Under rule 20 (a) (i) of the Rules of the BCA; and
(b) To avoid personal conflict of interest?
“The conclusions drawn from the analysis of the facts relative to the issues are that (i) Dave Cameron can make out an arguable case against the BCA’s decision; and (ii) the President is open to sanction by the Board and or the members of the BCA in respect of his conduct.” There was a motion to support Hunte at the election but after that motion was agreed on the BCA invited both Hunte and Cameron to send in manifestos. This, according to the legal advisor, means that the Hunte motion died after this action was taken by the BCA. Also, when the manifestos were sent in February 20, Hunte’s was sent off within minutes to the BCA directors, while Cameron’s, which was sent in about an hour after Hunte’s, was sent off by the CEO nine hours after.
The CEO then sent the board an e-mail at 12.19 pm, dated February 21, asking the members to vote on a motion that according to the legal expert had already died. The CEO then reported on February 22 that there were seven votes for of the motion to support Hunte. And what makes the case even stronger for Cameron is the fact that the BCA sent off their nominations to the WICB on February 20—two days before the BCA’s set deadline for their members to respond by voting.
The expert concluded: “Given the circumstances surrounding the manifestos, the death of the motion, errors in tally of votes, and dispatch of the nomination papers, it is highly likely that a court would hold on this issue that the BCA acted improper and procedurally wrong in this matter resulting in unfairness to disadvantage Dave Cameron.” If Cameron takes the BCA to court and is successful, he would become the next president of the WICB because Hunte’s seconding by the BCA would be illegal and because the deadline for nominations had passed, Cameron would be the only man standing for the post.
User comments posted on this website are the sole views and opinions of the comment writer and are not representative of Guardian Media Limited or its staff. Guardian Media Limited accepts no liability and will not be held accountable for user comments.
Please help us keep out site clean from inappropriate comments by using the flag option.
Guardian Media Limited reserves the right to remove, to edit or to censor any comments. Any content which is considered unsuitable, unlawful or offensive, includes personal details, advertises or promotes products, services or websites or repeats previous comments will be removed.