Graeme Smith, South Africa’s cricket director and former Test captain, has hit back through his lawyer on allegations of racial prejudice in an ombudsman’s report. David Becker, the former head of the International Cricket Council’s legal department and Smith’s personal attorney, issued a statement Friday detailing the findings of attorney Dumisa Ntsebeza, who heads a Social Justice and Nation Building Commission (SJN). ) to investigate allegations of racial discrimination in South America. African cricket. In a report released on Wednesday, Ntsebeza found that Smith “failed to rebut the presumption of unfair discrimination” by appointing former Test wicketkeeper and longtime teammate Boucher as head coach of the national team for Enoch Nkwe, a black coach who served briefly as national team director.
“Some of the findings are completely questionable and unfounded,” said Becker, who claimed attorneys for “several respondents” had raised “material concerns” about the integrity of the SJN process.
“Key pieces of evidence are simply not covered in the report,” Becker said.
For example, the ombudsman argues that Smith did not explain in his evidence why he appointed Boucher. However, the reasons are clearly stated by Smith and (former CSA chair) Mr (Chris) Nenzani in their affidavits filed with the SJN .”
Ntsebeza also found that Smith’s appointment was irregular and that a refusal to report to then chief executive Thabang Moroe, who was later fired for misconduct, was evidence of “racial prejudice against black leadership”.
Becker pointed out that Smith was not self-appointed and that his nomination was approved by the national selectors, CSA’s entire board and senior executives of the organization.
He had enjoyed working with Moroe’s acting successor, who was black, and three black presidents.
Becker did not directly address an allegation of racial bias in the decision when Smith captained to use star batsman AB de Villiers as wicketkeeper in a 2012 Test series in England for black reserve wicketkeeper Thami Tsolekile.
But Becker said CSA must be aware of “some fundamental flaws” during the hearings.
“For example, how do you come up with far-reaching and public findings of racial prejudice against certain people and say in the same breath that they are ‘provisional’, as the ombudsman has done?
“How is CSA expected to implement those findings when the ombudsman has said it cannot make definitive findings in a case where the evidence from both the alleged victims and the alleged perpetrators has not been tested”?
“Why has the evidence not been properly tested? The ombudsman had the opportunity to question the witnesses under the terms of reference and did not take that opportunity,” Becker said.
Topics mentioned in this article