The International Cricket Council (ICC) has condemned the government intervention in Guyana's cricket last month, which led to the installation of an interim committee, headed by Clive Lloyd.

In its first board meeting for 2012 in Dubai, which took place on Monday and Tuesday, the ICC spoke out against the sport ministry's move to replace the Guyana Cricket Board (GCB) with the Interim Management Committee (IMC).

The ICC statement read: "The ICC Board reiterates the principle of non-interference in the sport by governments and (was) concerned to learn of the developments in Guyana, where the government has dissolved the Guyana Cricket Board and replaced it with an Interim Management Committee."

The ICC also condemned "this government interference in the strongest possible terms. The ICC Board reaffirmed the principle of non-interference and that the only legitimate cricketing authority is that recognised by the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB)."

The matter has been a hotbed of controversy so far, with Guyana's Caribbean T20 and four-day tournament campaigns nearly derailed. The West Indies Cricket Board has refused to recognise the IMC, and only last-ditch negotiations allowed a Guyanese team to participate in the recent T20 competition.

In fact, last week the IMC and GCB announced separate 30-man squads for the upcoming four-day competition. Guyana will participate in the competition, though, but the WICB has rescinded their home matches.

On Monday West Indies Players Association (WIPA) president and CEO Dinanath Ramnarine, in response to the WICB's stance on the matter, reasoned that there are instances in other major cricketing territories where governments are strengthening laws to deal with corruption in sports. He pointed out that both the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) are government controlled. The ICC, however, has set a two-year mandate for cricketing bodies to remove themselves from political control.

He also pointed out that there is precedence for the ICC's acceptance of an interim committee, as was the case in Sri Lanka, when they supported a government-appointed committee because of controversy surrounding the then Board.