CHENNAI: After much discussion, debate and a little bit of haggling by stakeholders, the draft National Sports Governance Bill is set to see daylight soon. Union sports minister, Mansukh Mandaviya, has said that the proposed governance bill will be tabled in the Parliament for discussion and subsequent amendment this Monsoon session. The Bill is likely to be tabled next week. Implementation will be the key for its success.
This will be one of the most significant steps in Indian sports. The Bill should also include cricket as well. As of now, there is no set of uniform sports law of legal codes except for the National Sports Development Code 2011. With the passing of the Bill (after getting nod from both Houses), a lot of changes is expected in Indian sports ranging from governance to dispute resolutions. If implemented well, it could bring in positive changes too. Hopefully, the proposed sports bill will address all outstanding issues that are plaguing the country’s sporting ecosystem.
The proposed Bill strives to give more representation to women and bring in transparency in sports administration.
Court cases should stop
Going by the recent trend in court judgments (and affidavits in courts by the sports ministry), there is a concerted effort by all stakeholders to resolve outstanding issues relating to elections. Over the last few years because of the Rahul Mehra vs Union of India 2010-11 case and various court orders, things got complicated. Every NSF election could be challenged because of the 13 pitfalls suggested by Rahul Mehra, which the Delhi High Court had asked all NSFs and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) to follow. Not even one NSF has followed all the provisions of this 13 pitfalls as outlined by Mehra. And to follow it in the district level seems to be biggest concern. Similarly, in case of the draft Bill also, if the proposed National Sports Board interfere in district administration then it can once again turn into a mess. The number of districts will run into more than 25,000 for all NSFs. In any case, district and state associations are usually governed by state laws. Sports is state subject.
In 2024 alone, at least four NSFs (tennis, volleyball, wrestling and rowing) landed up in court because of elections. Recently, rowing and volleyball had some relief after the court modified the earlier orders. Then, there were a few NSFs like the equestrian and judo whose disputes are yet to be resolved. Interestingly, the judo federation is run by an administrator for close to three years and for some reason or the other election has not been called. Even the proposed new constitution has faced opposition from certain judo federation members. The Bill aims to bring an end to long court battles and appointments of administrators who usually leave the posts reluctantly after dragging it for a while.
The governance bill is also planning to constitute a tribunal. According to its revised draft bill earlier this year: “All civil cases concerning matters coming under the scope of this Bill and in which the NOC, the NPC or any NSF or RSF has been impleaded as party and is pending adjudication before a District Court or High Court immediately before the date of establishment of the National Sports Tribunal, shall, on such establishment, stand transferred to the National Sports Tribunal on such date as specified by the Central Government”.
Time-bound resolution must
However, just forming and transferring cases will not help. If there are 300 odd cases pending in various courts, then the number could be the same when the tribunal is functional. The tribunal must ensure that dispute resolution is done at the earliest. Cases in civil courts were taking time. For example, the All India Football Federation (AIFF) case is still pending in Supreme Court. Union vs Rahul Mehra case was on since 2010-2011. Jurisprudence should be time bound or else it will defeat the purpose.
Para-dropping of officials a concern
It all boils down to restrictive clause. The Delhi High Court in 2022 struck down the restrictive clause of the IOA that did not allow officials who has not been part of the executive committee to contest for the posts of office bearers – president, secretary and treasurer. This led to para-dropping of administrators in IOA and other NSFs as well, some without knowledge of sports administration.
The proposed Bill must have taken this into consideration and introduce some kind of mechanism through which persons with sports administration experience are given to chance to contest elections for the top posts. A person who wants to contest for the post of office bearer must spend some time in the Executive Council (EC). At least one or two years, even for Sportsperson of Outstanding Merit. Recent records are not favourable for SOMs in various posts in the IOA and NSFs. Take for example the IOA, AIFF, table tennis, etc. Majority of the EC members including the IOA president are outstanding sportspersons. But after one year in office, things have fallen apart. The EC is at loggerheads with the IOA president which led to partial sanctions by the International Olympic Committee (IOC). For a successful bid, the IOC had insisted that a strong National Olympic Committee (NOC) is required. And India are bidding for the 2036 Olympics.
Composition of the National Sports Board will be crucial as well. It should not be laden with government officials or politicians. There should be representation from various stakeholders who run the sporting ecosystem in the country. The recognition process too should be simplified. Going by the Bill and the NSFs, IOA and others will get one-year time to amend their constitution to align with the sports law. Similarly, even the composition of the tribunal will be critical for swift justice. It should be like the National Anti-Doping Agency. Its Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel takes months to resolve cases.
The age and tenure will also see a change. Earlier, a candidate who has attained the age of 70 was ineligible to continue in office as office bearer. But now if someone is not 70, he or she can contest elections and continue until the age of 74 (at least). The age cap has been extended to 75. Earlier, an office bearer can continue in office of IOA or NSF for 12 years (two four year term and one four year term as president with or without cooling off depending on their constitution). But now the Bill doesn’t restrict maximum period. It just says two four-year term and a cooling off period.
In short, if implemented well and not diluted in course of time, the new Bill might bring in significant change in India's sports ecosytem. And hopefully will help galvanize all NSFs and IOA under one roof before the 2036 Olympic bid pick more pace.