Express News Service
CHENNAI: It had been quite an anxious wait for the sports ministry and other stakeholders after the international football federation (FIFA) suspended the All India Football Federation (AIFF) last Monday. The suspension came as a shock as India only had less than two months before the U-17 Women’s World Cup to be held in October.
The sports ministry started engaging with FIFA to defuse the situation. After a few rounds of talks, they informed the Supreme Court about FIFA’s demands. It wanted the Committee of Administrators (CoA) to be repealed in full and the AIFF administration takes charge of its daily affairs.
FIFA and Asian Football Confederation (AFC) had been in consultation with AIFF and other stakeholders, including with CoA and ministry to find a common roadmap to get AIFF back on track. However, FIFA said that they found “serious deviation from the aforementioned roadmap”.
One such issue was the inclusion of 36 eminent players with voting rights in the electoral college. This, according to the CoA, was done as per the provisions of the sports code. And the ministry supported the move in court saying the sports code “is an enabling document and not a restrictive document”.
However, the code does not specify any number but recommends including prominent sportspersons in consultation with the ministry.
It says: “Inclusion of prominent sportspersons of outstanding merit as members of the respective sports federations on a tenure basis. The strength of such prominent sportspersons with voting rights should be a certain minimum percentage (say 25 per cent) of the total members representing the federation and selection of such sportspersons should be in consultation with this Department.”
The number can be more or less but needs to be included only after consultation with the ministry. The government also felt that this provision requires elaboration.
Finally, the Supreme Court agreed to 23 members of the executive council. In the draft constitution of the CoA, the number was 12 including one president and one treasurer. Out of the 10 EC members, five would be eminent players. The SC has allowed 17 members (one president, one treasurer and one vice president) from state/union territory units and six eminent players (four men and two women).
Interestingly, Gopal Sankaranarayanan representing the CoA had objected to the tenor of the FIFA letter. He also informed the court that a forensic audit had been undertaken by the CoA to determine financial irregularities in the AIFF. The court said it has taken note of the development. He also pointed out that a contempt petition has been filed against some of the members who are part of the electoral college.
CoA in IOA stayed
The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Delhi High Court order that brought Indian Olympic Association (IOA) under the CoA. The matter was heard by the division bench of Justices SA Nazeer and JK Maheshwari. According to IOA, the court issued notices to Centre, IOA and other parties to respond and the matter has been listed after four weeks.
The IOA had approached the SC on Thursday and asked them to look into the matter because this could attract suspension from the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Even solicitor general Tushar Mehta told the court that this could lead to suspension.
The sports ministry started engaging with FIFA to defuse the situation. After a few rounds of talks, they informed the Supreme Court about FIFA’s demands. It wanted the Committee of Administrators (CoA) to be repealed in full and the AIFF administration takes charge of its daily affairs.
FIFA and Asian Football Confederation (AFC) had been in consultation with AIFF and other stakeholders, including with CoA and ministry to find a common roadmap to get AIFF back on track. However, FIFA said that they found “serious deviation from the aforementioned roadmap”.
One such issue was the inclusion of 36 eminent players with voting rights in the electoral college. This, according to the CoA, was done as per the provisions of the sports code. And the ministry supported the move in court saying the sports code “is an enabling document and not a restrictive document”.
However, the code does not specify any number but recommends including prominent sportspersons in consultation with the ministry.
It says: “Inclusion of prominent sportspersons of outstanding merit as members of the respective sports federations on a tenure basis. The strength of such prominent sportspersons with voting rights should be a certain minimum percentage (say 25 per cent) of the total members representing the federation and selection of such sportspersons should be in consultation with this Department.”
The number can be more or less but needs to be included only after consultation with the ministry. The government also felt that this provision requires elaboration.
Finally, the Supreme Court agreed to 23 members of the executive council. In the draft constitution of the CoA, the number was 12 including one president and one treasurer. Out of the 10 EC members, five would be eminent players. The SC has allowed 17 members (one president, one treasurer and one vice president) from state/union territory units and six eminent players (four men and two women).
Interestingly, Gopal Sankaranarayanan representing the CoA had objected to the tenor of the FIFA letter. He also informed the court that a forensic audit had been undertaken by the CoA to determine financial irregularities in the AIFF. The court said it has taken note of the development. He also pointed out that a contempt petition has been filed against some of the members who are part of the electoral college.
CoA in IOA stayed
The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Delhi High Court order that brought Indian Olympic Association (IOA) under the CoA. The matter was heard by the division bench of Justices SA Nazeer and JK Maheshwari. According to IOA, the court issued notices to Centre, IOA and other parties to respond and the matter has been listed after four weeks.
The IOA had approached the SC on Thursday and asked them to look into the matter because this could attract suspension from the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Even solicitor general Tushar Mehta told the court that this could lead to suspension.
For all the latest Sports News Click Here
For the latest news and updates, follow us on Google News.