Tricky IOA election game to commence after High Court judgment

Express News Service

There had been some interesting arguments in the Delhi High Court regarding the composition of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), its constitution and elections. The hearing was over last month and the order has been reserved and is expected any moment. There has been quite an anxious wait not just among IOA members but also administrators across all sports.

Going by the arguments, hearing and the recommendations made by former sports secretary, Injeti Srinivas, who was appointed by the HC to assist administrator, retired judge Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, sweeping changes are expected. Srinivas was entrusted with the job of submitting those recommendations on the 13 points raised by senior advocate Rahul Mehra, who has been repeatedly saying that IOA constitution was not aligned with the sports code. The two-judge bench of judges Manmohan J and Nazmi Waziri heard both the parties and the order was reserved on April 12.

The rivalry between IOA president and secretary general is out in the open. Its bitterness has spilled over to National Sports Federations (NSFs) and State Olympic Associations too. There was interesting representation from the secretary general’s side. In an order dated 23.03.2022, the HC listed out the substance of the secretary general’s argument. One such point is about the restrictive clause. 

“The restrictive clause 11.1.3 of the IOA Constitution should be read down. He refers to the affidavit of the Government of India and other documents in support of this contention,” said the order.

And the other two points that seemed interesting were: “Any office bearer seeking re-election would have to mandatorily secure a majority of 2/3rd of the votes.” And, “An individual against whom charges have been framed will be ineligible to hold any post of the IOA.” The IOA president is seeking re-election and 2/3rd majority is never easy.

In the last order, dated 22.04-2022, the court’s written observations stood out. Under para 6 it said, “The IOA ‘President’ has sought to convene a Special GBM even when judgment has been reserved in the writ petition which covers issues concerning the Constitution of the IOA, as well as Members of its GBM who may or may not be eligible to vote or participate in a GBM.” 

This indicates that under the new constitution, some members could be ineligible to participate in elections. The court also said “The term of IOA’s Management Committee has already expired on 14th December 2021.”

Things could get more complicated as the Commonwealth (July-August) and Asian Games (September) draw closer. Though selection and sending athletes should not be a problem as the government would sanction the money, but like on numerous occasions, there would be issues regarding officials representing the IOA that could get complicated. With the house divided, it might get ugly. There are indications that an administrator would be appointed under whose supervision the changes in the constitution would be initiated and the elections would be held.

Yet, even after the court order, changes would take time. A Special General Body or a general body meeting would be called to change the constitution and then a general body meeting needs to be called for elections. Thirty days are required for a general body meeting. The electoral college would be redrafted according to the new constitution.

Perhaps it would be prudent to have one vote for those NSFs that are affiliated to international federations and part of the Olympics programme and may be half or no vote for non-Olympic NSFs. This could prevent cross-voting when there are more than one vote. For example, take the case of the present IOA. If there is no consensus among members, there is every possibility that one person may vote for the president while another votes for the secretary. Whether or not state units have voting rights need to be seen. 

Differential voting rights may not be permitted and more sportspersons may get into IOA board. And of course, the jumbo executive council size could see pruning. International Olympic Committee executive board has one president, four vice presidents and 10 members. The IOA has 31:  president 1, senior vice president 2, VP 9, secretary general 1, treasurer 1, joint secretary 6 and EC members 10 and athletes’ representative 1.

Though the court has been reiterating that the elections should be conducted as early as possible, but there have been occasions when the process had taken more than six months. Under these circumstances this would mean after the Asian Games. Even if there is an executive council that’s helping the administrators, things will not be easy. As things stand, the real game will begin after the judgement.