As soon as the 2017 draft sports code proposal was laid before the Indian Olympic Association, National Sports Federations and other stakeholders, as expected, there was an immediate response of rejection. This newspaper had reported on October 11 that the IOA would oppose the entire sports code and as the deadline to submit suggestions ended on November 10, IOA sent a letter and 13-page explainer reiterating its stand late on Sunday.
Rajeev Mehta, the IOA secretary-general, was quite clear on Monday. “We cannot accept the age and tenure cap for all members. It should limit to only three office bearers,” he said. “We need voting rights for all state Olympic associations. Political patronage is crucial and we need changes in the cooling-off period.” The letter to the ministry echoes almost all NSFs’ concerns.
The sports ministry, perhaps, was not expecting such a strong stand against the draft sports code after a congenial meeting of all stakeholders in New Delhi on October 11. The IOA and the NSFs were quite clear about their stand though – object to everything. Their concerns were multifarious. The moment the draft sports code turns into a policy most of the members (anybody who has spent more than a decade) would be ineligible overnight and their hegemony would end. This is something the IOA feels would be detrimental to the running of the sports in the country because of its uniqueness and because it’s a specialised field. The IOA’s argument is that experience matters. Ostensibly so, like always, protest is the only way out of a corner.
With the Olympics next year, it would be prudent for the ministry and all stakeholders to not force things and get distracted from the challenge in hand. And right now it is the 2020 Olympics where India need to perform better than 2016. There is little time to lose and if officials, of ministry and IOA, get embroiled in an unwarranted tussle, this will definitely affect the training and preparation.
Though sports-legal experts believe ministry’s draft sports code proposal would not amount to interference, there could be certain provisions that can be exploited by the IOA officials and attract
ban from the International Olympic Committee in an Olympic year.
Besides the age and tenure issue (extended to all members from just office-bearers, as mandated in 2011 code), the provision where ministers, MPs, MLAs, MLCs are barred from holding office in federations is a sticky issue.
This newspaper had reported on October 26 that these provisions might get looked into and revised. The IOA now wants the age cap too be increased by five years to 75. Interestingly, the IOA and NSFs were fine with 70-year age cap for its office bearers as mandated by 2011 sports code. The ministry had hinted at modifying certain provisions to allow politicians, bureaucrats to be part of sports administration (as reported on October 26).
It needs to be seen how the ministry reacts after the 2017 draft sports code is rejected by the IOA. Sports secretary RS Julaniya said the ministry would follow procedure. “We had given November 10 as deadline and we will analyse the feedback given by IOA and other stakeholders and see how we can improve good governance of sport. It’s still in draft stage and open for discussion.”
As things stand, it’s better to wait and watch now.
