The tenure guidelines-Part I

Will the new Govt retain National Sports Code?

What could be of immediate interest to sports-lovers as the BJP Government takes over?

Obviously the priority that the Government will provide to sports and the budgetary allocation for it may figure uppermost in the minds of a majority of sports-lovers.

They could also be expected to look out for any new sports development plan, fresh financial incentives to sportspersons and additional thrust in the preparations of teams for this year’s Asian Games and the Commonwealth Games.

Also of interest could be any indication of a possible bid to host the 2019 Asian Games, and possibly Olympic Games sometime in the future, plus a call for a thorough revamp of the existing sports administration in the country including that of the Sports Authority of India (SAI).
But is that all? A lot many people, especially sports officials, could be looking at possible policy changes that the new Government may bring in.

Of immediate concern to the National Sports Federations (NSFs) would be the fate of the National Sports Code, especially its provisions related to tenure and age restrictions for office-bearers of the NSFs including the Indian Olympic Association (IOA).

BJP leaders Arun Jaitley and Vijay Kumar Malhotra have in the past expressed opposition and reservations about the proposed Sports Bill.

Sports officials had suggested during the time the International Olympic Committee (IOC suspended the IOA in December, 2012, that it was only a matter of time for a new government to take over and the issues related to the National Sports Code and the tenure guidelines could be sorted out with the change in government.

AAA de-recognised

Malhotra, one of the veteran BJP leaders, heads the Archery Association of India (AAI), which had been de-recognized by the Government on the argument that he had served more than three terms as its president and had crossed the age of 70 against the guidelines incorporated in the National Sports Code.

The outgoing Union Sports Minister, Jitendra Singh, had said in December, 2012, “the (Delhi) High Court in its Civil Writ Petition No.195/2010 dated 15.02.2012 and 17.09.2012 had directed that the Government shall not grant recognition to the Archery Association of India unless they hold elections as per the Sports Code. In view of the directions of the High Court, the Government has no option but to withdraw the recognition of the Archery Association of India."

Malhotra, a former Chief Executive Councillor of Delhi, one of the most experienced sports administrators in the country, a strong critic of Government ‘interference’ in the autonomous functioning of the NSFs, especially its “draconian Sports Bill” (which is yet to be introduced), has long held the view that Olympic sports should be governed by the Olympic Charter without ‘interference’ from the Government.

“Let the Government seek accounts for the grants that it gives, let it regulate participation in international competitions and in the matter of invitations to foreign teams when foreign policy issues could be involved, let it create and maintain infrastructure, let it manage the Sports Authority of India, but leave the selection of teams etc to the federations.

“And, more importantly, in a democratic set-up let there be no stipulations about tenure, age etc of the sports officials. If it is not there for other registered societies, why should it be there only for sports bodies? “

This in a nutshell had been the argument of Malhotra all these years.

The Government, the media, at least a section of the Parliamentarians and the public, on the other hand, had been singing a different tune. Put curbs on them, make them accountable, let them not spoil the talent in this country, let there be more transparency in their functioning.

Forced to bring in regulations to control and restrict the authority of the NSFs, the government the past three years had become bolder, practically dictating terms in sanctioning coaches and camps, approving and rejecting foreign exposure requests, allotting funds for development, coaching and competitions etc.
The Government’s argument has been since public funds were being utilized and the name of the country was being used in international fora it had a duty to perform to explain to Parliament and public how funds were being utilized and how selection etc was being done.

The villains?

The sports administrators having long been painted ‘villains’ in this constant tussle with the government, there was a general belief that more stringent controls were necessary to curb malpractices and to keep a watch on biased selection of teams. The chorus grew post-CWG.

The media, when it could turn its attention away from cricket, had been highlighting deficiencies in the functioning of the Olympic bodies, but as it turns out, cricket, the most popular of the sport and one which gets all the media attention, especially the television, seems to be the most mismanaged rather than being the most professionally-administered as had been made out all these years.
Just because a sport earns money, it does not mean there cannot be mismanagement.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India, however, is the only body that refuses to register itself with the government as a National Sports Federation since it does not want to come under government control and curbs. More importantly, it does not want to be subjected to the Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005.

No Cabinet support for Maken

Sports Minister Ajay Maken was keen that the BCCI be brought under all regulations, especially the RTI Act. He could not, however muster enough support from within the Cabinet when he brought up the draft Bill in August , 2011.  By highlighting the BCCI angle, he might have actually lost a chance to push through that Bill, at least in the Cabinet. He could have been better off by concentrating on the rest of the NSFs, mainly those in charge of Olympic disciplines. 
Maken's arguments were indeed valid and are still valid, those about the cricket bodies taking concessions related to stadia, entertainment tax, land allotment etc though these aspects do not come under direct financial assistance from the Central or State governments.

Put in cold storage , the draft got revived with  the ministry appointing a committee under Justice Mukul Mudgal to fine tune it before placing it in the public domain in July, 2013. Nothing much has been heard about that since except a statement from the Minister to confirm that they would be sitting with the IOC and re-drafting the Bill so that it does not encroach on the ‘autonomy’ of the NOC and the NSFs.

Sitting with the IOC to draft a Bill that would attempt to control the NSFs might sound strange especially when you consider the fact that the IOC suspension was mainly related to "Government interference" in the autonomous functioning of the sports bodies.
There we go again. Autonomy. We will come to that later.

(Part II is here: Kaypee's Capers: The tenure guidelines-Part II (kaypeem.blogspot.com)