"As I see it the ICC Code of Conduct needs to be revamped or rehauled, whatever you may call it. Currently the BCCI could not have asked for an appeal against the decision of the judicial commissioner (Gordon Lewis who let off Anderson). The appellant in this case could have been only the ICC. It's a big flaw (in the process)," BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel said today.
"I have already asked our boys at the BCCI and our lawyers to look into the entire Code of Conduct process and find out places where it can be tightened. Once this is done we will be sending a mail to ICC suggesting these changes to be undertaken for discussion at the right forum of ICC, whenever it takes place. At the moment there is no scheduled meeting of ICC.
"I will also write about the absence of video footage and insist this should not happen. This is all for the good governance of the game," said Patel.
The incident occurred during the lunch break of the second day's play in the first Test between England and India at Trent Bridge in Nottingham last month. The Indians alleged that pacer Anderson pushed and abused Jadeja, while England laid a counter-charge against the Indian all-rounder.
Match referee David Boon fined Jadeja for the incident which was appealed against by the Indians and the judicial commissioner declared Jadeja not guilty of breaching the players' Code of Conduct.
But he also let off Anderson, who was facing a ban of a few matches if found guilty, for lack of evidence as the video footage of the incident was not available.
BCCI expressed disappointment with the judicial commissioner's verdict and requested David Richardson to file an appeal against the verdict but the ICC CEO rejected it yesterday.
Confirming that it received and considered the written decision of judicial commissioner Lewis in respect of his findings that Anderson and Jadeja were not guilty of breaching the ICC Code of Conduct, following the disciplinary hearing held in Southampton last week, the world governing body said it was satisfied with the reasons given for the verdict.
It also decided not to exercise its discretion to appeal against the decision relating to Anderson, pursuant to clause 8.3.2 of the ICC Code of Conduct.
"This outcome is the result of two exhaustive and thorough disciplinary processes and, after considering the written decision, the ICC is satisfied with the manner in which the decisions have been reached," Richardson said in a statement.
"It was a complicated and sensitive matter relating to charges brought against two players at different levels of the ICC Code of Conduct. There appears to have been vastly conflicting evidence on both sides, with a total of 13 witnesses who gave testimony.
"After carefully considering the decision by Gordon Lewis, whose vast experience was invaluable to the process over recent weeks, we believe that no further purpose would be served by prolonging the process through further appeal proceedings," he said.
"The disciplinary procedures were robust and transparent and all parties had ample opportunity to ask questions, test the evidence and make submissions. We have determined that there is no merit in an appeal and that it would not be in the best interest of the sport to take such action.
"As a matter of best practice, the ICC will now review the procedures as set out in the Code and reflect upon the comments made by Gordon Lewis in his decision about how a case of this nature might better be provided for in the future," he added.