CHENNAI: Unfortunately, it’s back to square one - another deadlock. The Indian Olympic Association is in a mess. The IOA emergency Executive Committee meeting that could have brought some solace or some kind of solution to the ongoing tussle between the EC members and the IOA president ended in another stalemate.
The meeting had a one-point agenda – ratification of Chief Executive Officer’s appointment after negotiating salary – but the EC members wanted to add 14 more points for discussion during the meeting.
The way things stand, perhaps, the Supreme Court should take note of this standoff. The SC had said that “no other court will entertain any petition relating to the amendment of the constitution of the IOA or to the election to the Executive Committee of the IOA. All objections be submitted by any person or party before this court alone.”
It is understood that IOA president PT Usha did not want the points to be discussed during the meeting on Thursday and wanted the appointment of the CEO passed by the members.
According to minutes in circulation and signed by ten EC members, the meeting was attended by Jerome Poivey, the Head of Institutional Relations and Governance, NOC Relations Department International Olympic Committee, who was part of the meeting as special guest.
What seemed even more bewildering is that both the factions instead of resolving the issues stood their ground. The EC members wanted to discuss the 14 points that included the issue of selection and nomination of Sportspersons of Outstanding Merit (SOMs), withdrawal of “threat” letters by the president, but the IOA president, who called the meeting, did not allow it.
However, the validity of the minutes was being questioned because it was not signed by the IOA president, who convened the meeting.
It is understood that the EC members were not happy that their points were not allowed to be discussed. According to the minutes in circulation, which incidentally did not have the signature of the IOA president who called the meeting, the EC has decided to bring Kalyan Chaubey, the joint secretary, back as acting-CEO.
He was ineligible after he completed two months in office last time. The IOC had threatened action against the IOA until the CEO was appointed and even deferred the IOC Session in Mumbai. Usha, apparently, was not allowed to make her opening address.
The warring factions of the IOA are questioning the validity of their own elections. This newspaper has already pointed out how invalidation of SOM candidates’ nomination may threaten the validity of the IOA election. The report had also highlighted how the IOA election could be under the scanner.
The appointment of CEO Raghuram Iyer was made on January 15 after the January 5 EC meeting where his name was apparently discussed. The EC later said that they objected to the appointment of the CEO and had not acknowledged his presence in the IOA.
On the other hand, the CEO had been attending meetings with the sports ministry, the SAI and the IOC. What seems interesting is that the sports ministry and the SAI that seemed to be quite active during the IOA elections two years ago seemed to have gone silent.
This has seriously affected India’s potential bid process for the 2036 Olympics. The IOC had already said that a strong IOA is needed to back its bid. The IOC also said that they are yet to receive selected region names for the proposed Olympics.
One must keep in mind that the selection process for 2032 Brisbane was finalized in 2021, 11 years in advance. Going by this, 2036 hosts could be finalized by 2025 or in the next couple of years after a new IOC chief is elected.