Shillong, Jun 29: Escalating the internal rift within the Meghalaya Cricket Association, a group of Apex Council members on Monday issued a statement accusing the president James K Sangma, who was recently elected as Rajya Sabha MP, of bypassing the Constitution and taking “unilateral” decisions — including suspending the Honorary Secretary and declaring a Special General Meeting “redundant” — without council consent.

“Within the space of 48 hours, the President of this Association has, entirely on his own authority and without the knowledge, consultation or approval of the Apex Council: suspended an elected Honorary Secretary; dismissed the Head Coach and Team Manager; declared a validly convened Special General Meeting redundant; and personally written to the BCCI President attaching his unilateral orders,” the statement said.

The members said none of the actions followed the MCA Constitution. “Not one of these actions was placed before the Apex Council for collective deliberation. The President has acted as though the Apex Council does not exist and as though the Constitution is a matter of personal convenience,” they said.

The council members rejected the President’s claim that the SGM scheduled for July 3, 2026, was “redundant.”

“Rule 26 of the MCA Constitution does not vest in the President any power to nullify, cancel or declare redundant a validly convened Special General Meeting,” the statement said.

They argued the suspension of the Honorary Secretary could not invalidate the meeting.

“The SGM was convened by the Honorary Secretary in accordance with the Constitution before his suspension. The suspension — which itself is constitutionally void for want of quorum, Show Cause Notice and due process — cannot retroactively invalidate a meeting that was already validly called,” they said.

“A meeting belongs to the members, not to the President. Only the General Body can decide whether its own meeting is redundant. The SGM of 3rd July 2026 must proceed as scheduled,” they added.

The statement also questioned the President’s remarks on Justice (Retd) BD Agarwal as Ombudsman.

“Under Rule 40(1), the Ombudsman must be appointed by the General Body at the Annual General Meeting. An informal agreement to appoint is not an appointment,” the members said.

“If Justice Agarwal was agreed upon informally but never appointed through a duly convened AGM, he is not the validly appointed Ombudsman of the MCA. Any proceedings purportedly conducted under his authority are therefore constitutionally infirm,” they added.  They said the President “cannot use the absence of a valid Ombudsman to justify emergency action” when he had the power to convene an AGM/SGM to make the appointment properly.

The members said the President’s direct communication to the BCCI President violated constitutional norms.  “Under Rule 17(k), it is the Apex Council — not the President alone — that holds the power to communicate with and make representations to the BCCI on behalf of the Association,” the statement said.  “A unilateral letter to the BCCI, presenting actions taken without quorum and without collective Apex Council approval as institutional decisions of the MCA, misrepresents the constitutional position of the Association,” they said.  Due process vs ‘zero tolerance’.

While supporting action on sexual harassment, the council members stressed that procedures must be followed.  “No right-thinking person opposes zero tolerance for sexual harassment. The concerned members of the Apex Council are equally committed to the protection of women players,” they said.

“However, zero tolerance for misconduct does not and cannot mean zero tolerance for constitutional process. The Constitution exists precisely to ensure that even the most serious allegations are dealt with fairly, collectively and lawfully through Show Cause Notices, the Disciplinary Sub-Committee, and the Ombudsman,” they added.

“A President who bypasses the Constitution in the name of justice is not delivering justice; he is substituting his own individual judgment for the rule of law,” the statement said.

The members underscored that the General Body has final authority under the Constitution.

“Under Rule 16, all powers of governance, management and decision-making vest in the General Body. The Apex Council exercises authority only as delegated by the General Body,” they said.

“Rule 16(b) expressly empowers the General Body to review and reverse any decision of the Apex Council. This means the General Body, at the SGM of 3rd July 2026, has the full constitutional authority to review and reverse every unilateral action taken by the President,” they said.

“The President’s declaration that the SGM is redundant is constitutionally baseless. The SGM is the most constitutionally powerful meeting that can be held at this moment,” they added.

The statement urged all district associations to attend the meeting.

“No proclamation by the President, no unilateral order, and no press conference can strip the General Body of its supreme constitutional authority,” they said.  The members clarified they were not opposing action against wrongdoing.

“This statement is not directed against any individual, nor does it seek to obstruct any legitimate action against those found responsible for misconduct. We stand firmly with the women players. However, justice must be delivered through constitutional procedures, not in spite of them,” the statement concluded.

Also Read: Meghalaya High Court upholds bail of Sonam Raghuvanshi in Raja murder case

Also Watch

Find latest news from every corner of Northeast India at hubnetwork.in, your online source for breaking news, video coverage.

Also, Follow us on

Twitter-twitter.com/nemediahub

Youtube channel- www.youtube.com/@NortheastMediaHub2020

Instagram- www.instagram.com/ne_media_hub

Download our app from playstore – Northeast Media Hub