The International Hockey Federation has fired a fresh salvo at the Indian Hockey Federation in its so called efforts to resolve the dispute related to matters hockey in India.
In a letter to the IHF, the FIH Chief Executive, Kelly Fairweather has said that “the objections you try to raise in your letters of April 15 and 16, 2013 to the use of Art 2.4(d) of the FIH Statutes to resolve the IHF’s claim to FIH membership are rejected.
The letter, a copy of which is with the Express, goes on to bring up various contentious issues. There is an obvious attempt to exert pressure on the IHF.
“As a result, it is absolutely clear that the only way that the competing claims to FIH membership of the IHF and Hockey India are going to be resolved is through the mechanism contemplated by Art 2.4(d) of the FIH Statutes. We therefore strongly urge the IHF to participate in full in the proceedings before the independent committee. If it does not do so, we will be forced to ask the independent committee to consider the matter based on the materials that the IHF submitted to the IOA special committee last year. However, we would much prefer that the IHF take its own course before the independent committee. If it fails to do so, that will be at its own risk,” Fairweather concludes.
It appears to be an attempt to brow beat the IHF and everyone concerned by mixing up several issues. The FIH letter has conveniently overlooked some very important and core issues to the dispute:
1. How and why did the FIH give recognition to HI in November 2008 when it was not even registered in India? It was officially registered in India only in March 2009. Why has the FIH not made a mention of this and why is it hiding this fact from the one-man panel of Denis Oswald which has been set up by the FIH itself?
2. The FIH has accepted the Delhi’s HC verdict to maintain status quo. How can it form any committee to and over look the Delhi HC verdict ?
3. It is not just the Delhi HC. The Supreme Court is also involved. The SC has asked the concerned parties to come to an amicable settlement and revert back to them. This has not happened till now. FIH, the Sports Ministry and the vested interests in IOA have been colluding to entirely avoid going to the SC.
4. The FIH cannot change its constitution or statute to arrive at decisions which are convenient for it. The very reason to change the statutes is to accommodate the FIH’s desire to make HI a legal entity. This itself must be questioned by the IHF in the HC, SC and also the CAS.
These points clearly show that the FIH is acting only to save HI and its own skin.