Taffazul Rizvi, Pakistan Cricket Board’s legal counsel who is currently in New Delhi, explains to DNA why the PCB was helpless during the trial
How do you react to the developments in London?
I witnessed the proceedings for 10 days. The court delivered the judgment under the English laws.
It was a detailed trial and we feel that justice has been served.
The boys had their own legal representation. Because of the ICC rules, the board cannot provide any legal assistance to them.
Since the time they were suspended under anti-corruption code, they had to have their own legal representation. We’ve observed the trial.
There is no concern over impartiality of the trial. It was very fair and impartial.
Why there was no trial in Pakistan?
Since the incident had taken place in London, only the English courts had the jurisdiction to conduct the trial. It could not have taken place anywhere else.
But there were no conviction for previous match-fixing incidents?
The current case is a criminal investigation initiated by London police. So this comes under the criminal laws of England.
There is a suggestion that this could have happened in Pakistan but it cannot happen because under the Common Law of the world, which is followed by India, Pakistan and other countries, the trial had to take place in London.
As far as previous cases are concerned, at that time there was no ICC anti-corruption code under which the current issue is being handled.
Does it mean if a case had been filed against Salim Malik by the PCB, then there would have been a trial?
It was never a criminal case. That was an inquiry and pursuant to that a ban was imposed on the player. The criminal angle came for the first time now.
When the incident came to light in London, the police there warned the PCB that as long as their investigations were not completed, no other authorities can take action.
Could they not have avoided the London laws even after coming back to Pakistan?
After the incident, the boys were not arrested only because the PCB had given an undertaking that they will be presented to the police whenever required. And later when the boys wanted to come back to Pakistan, they had also given undertakings that they will present themselves whenever needed.
What about the quantum of punishment?
The judgment is always based on evidence and the material presented before the judge. The punishment was on the lower side of the scale, they could have been jailed up to seven years.
One really cannot question that unless someone has seen the whole material.
What is the future for these three players?
I think they have already started serving the prison sentence. They have to be in jail till the time the order is set aside, or given bail. As far as their future is concerned, you have to ask the players’ lawyers. I don’t know whether they will appeal. Appeal is always given in the statute.
What is PCB’s position? Your players were caught in the case.
As our chairman has said, once we receive the judgment, the PCB will do its own investigation.
What about Danish Kaneria? He went to court against the PCB.
The petition filed by Danish Kaneria in Pakistan high court was dismissed today (Thursday). I argued that in the high court in Karachi two weeks ago.
Now that you are in Delhi, will you not be initiating talks on India-Pakistan cricket ties?
We are for immediate resumption of India-Pakistan cricket ties. Our new chairman has also reiterated this position.
Is there any movement on that front?
Our chairman has gone to Dubai. We will see what comes out of his meetings.
Comments