Nothing is stopping the Cricket Australia board from unilaterally removing David Warner’s leadership ban and ending a saga called “shambolic” by his lawyer, despite claims by the chief executive Nick Hockley that it must be dealt with by an independent commission.
In radio and press interviews on Friday, Hockley insisted there were “mandatory standards of Sports Integrity Australia” that CA was bound to abide by, stressing that the governing body had no ability to reverse Warner’s ban by any other avenue than through a hearing run by the independent commissioners.
However, multiple sources confirmed to The Age and The Herald on Saturday that Sports Integrity Australia does not set mandatory parameters for CA other than to require impartiality from tribunal members. It has no power to stop the CA board from discussing or overturning Warner’s ban.
Warner’s lawyer, Adam Lunn, also asserted that the board had the power to overturn the ban.
David Warner signs autographs for fans in Adelaide.Credit:Getty Images
“One thing has been lost in all this mess,” Lunn said. “Back in 2018, CA’s board [not an independent panel] received a hurried report from CA Integrity and within a matter of days decided to seek to impose a lifetime ban on David’s leadership.
“He accepted it and has worked hard since then to better himself notwithstanding that there was no prospect of him ever holding a leadership position again.
“Of course CA’s board now has the power to review and ‘lift’ its own ban. It was a CA board ban and CA is the governing body. Why CA doesn’t just do that only compounds the shambolic approach taken by the panel.”
Sports Integrity Australia is an executive agency of the Australian government that was formed in 2020 by combining the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, The National Integrity of Sport Unit, and the integrity programs of the Australian Sports Commission.
“It’s a matter for Cricket Australia,” an ASC spokesman said.
By way of response, CA has argued that its integrity policies need to be approved by Sports Integrity Australia, including requirements for impartial tribunal members.
But multiple sport integrity experts on Saturday backed up the interpretation that it was within the constitutional powers of the CA board to unilaterally lift Warner’s ban without recourse to an independent integrity process.
Warner was banned from holding leadership positions in Australian cricket for life as part of CA’s response to the 2018 Newlands scandal.
The ban was imposed directly and additionally by the CA board, then chaired by David Peever, after its integrity unit and executive had recommended hefty but not lifetime playing bans for Warner, Steve Smith and Cameron Bancroft.
CA subsequently argued that because the leadership ban was written onto Warner’s charge sheet, it could not be reconsidered or overturned without a rewrite of the code of conduct to make this possible.
Hockley, who had personally worked alongside head of integrity Jacqui Partridge to review and rewrite the governing body’s code of conduct, to find a way for Warner’s case and other long-term sanctions to be reconsidered, had argued the matter was out of CA’s hands.
“What we have demonstrated is that we have very strong integrity processes that are in line with best practice, including the mandatory standards of Sports Integrity Australia,” Hockley said.
“The alternative to putting in place a proper process is just to make reactive decisions. That is not appropriate around matters of integrity. The sports world globally is under the microscope for their integrity processes. I will make no apology for the fact we’ve engaged with the best people we’ve got, best in class governance, and we run a proper, fair, independent process.”
Warner created chaos on Wednesday night when he revealed a decision to drop out of the code of conduct process to have his ban overturned because he feared the matter would go to a hearing that amounted to a “public lynching” of him and his family, five years after the Newland scandal.
In his statement, Warner revealed that the code of conduct commissioners overseeing the case and their counsel assisting, who was later removed, had indicated that they thought CA needed a public “cleansing” around the 2018 ball tampering affair.
“In effect, counsel assisting, and, it appears, to some extent the review panel, want to conduct a public trial of me and what occurred during the Third Test at Newlands,” Warner had said. “They want to conduct a public spectacle to, in the panel’s words, have a “cleansing”.
“It appears that the panel has given no more than passing consideration to issues of player welfare and the interests of Australian cricket and is instead determined to conduct a public lynching.
“Regrettably, I have no practical alternative at this point in time but to withdraw my application. I am not prepared to subject my family or my teammates to further trauma and disruption by accepting a departure from the way in which my application should be dealt with pursuant to the code of conduct. Some things are more important than cricket.”
