Sports Governance in India

Sports play a vital role in shaping the social and cultural fabric of any nation. In India, with its vast and diverse population, sports have always been a unifying force and a source of national pride. Over the years, India’s journey in sports has moved from informal community games to participation on global platforms such as the Olympics and World Championships. 

However, effective governance remains a crucial factor in harnessing the potential of Indian sports. 

Constitutional and Legal Framework on Sports Governance in India

In India, the subject of sports falls under the State List as per the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. This means that the responsibility for the promotion, development, and management of sports primarily lies with the respective State and Union Territory governments. The Central Government, however, supplements these efforts through policy initiatives, financial support, and creating national institutions.

One of the key principles that govern sports administration in India is derived from the Olympic Charter, which restricts government interference in the autonomous functioning of sports federations. Consequently, major sports bodies operate as autonomous entities to ensure freedom in their functioning, maintain the spirit of fair competition, and align with international sporting norms.

Legally, the sports governing bodies such as the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), National Sports Federations (NSFs), State Olympic Associations (SOAs), and federations of non-Olympic sports (for example, the Board of Control for Cricket in India – BCCI) are registered as societies under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. This registration accords them legal status and subjects them to applicable regulations, while allowing them autonomy in their operations.

Evolution of Sports Governance in India

India’s sports governance has evolved through various phases. In pre-colonial times, sports were organised at a local level, often as community or traditional events. During British colonial rule, formal organisations were introduced, mainly for Western sports like cricket, hockey, and athletics, leading to structured competitions.

Post-Independence, there was an emphasis on institutional development to professionalise sports. The establishment of the Sports Authority of India (SAI) in 1984 was a landmark in this journey. Alongside, institutions like the National Institute of Sports (NIS) and various training centres were created to provide systematic coaching, training facilities, and talent identification programmes.

The creation of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS) gave a focused governmental body responsible for national sports policy, funding, and oversight. Together, these bodies formed the basis of modern sports governance in India.

Structure of Governance: The Two-Pillar Model

India’s sports governance rests on a two-pillar system comprising autonomous bodies and government bodies working in tandem.

Autonomous Bodies

The apex autonomous body is the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). It oversees the National Sports Federations (NSFs), which manage specific sports disciplines. Each state has its own State Olympic Association (SOA) that works under the IOA’s umbrella. These bodies organise sporting events, select teams, and promote sports at various levels.

Examples of autonomous bodies include federations like the IOA, NSFs for athletics, boxing, hockey, and non-Olympic sport federations such as the BCCI (cricket) and AIFF (football). These bodies are affiliated with their respective international federations.

Government Bodies

The government’s role is carried out primarily through the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS), which formulates policies and allocates funding. Under MYAS, the Sports Authority of India (SAI) manages infrastructure, training centres, and talent development programmes. These bodies provide necessary financial assistance, build sports infrastructure, and help build capacity for athletes and coaches.

This two-pillar system allows autonomous sports bodies to focus on their specific sports administration, while government bodies provide resources and policy support.

Key Legal and Regulatory Instruments

• National Sports Development Code of India, 2011: This Code governs the functioning of all National Sports Federations in India. It mandates transparent and fair election processes, financial disclosures, term limits for office bearers, and the establishment of grievance redressal mechanisms. The Code aims to promote accountability and good governance practices within sports federations.
• Prevention of Sexual Harassment (PoSH) Act, 2013: In compliance with this law, all sports bodies are required to have an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to address cases of sexual harassment. However, surveys have revealed that many sports federations lack these mandatory committees, exposing athletes to potential risks.
• National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA): NADA enforces anti-doping regulations in line with international standards. It carries out drug testing, educational programmes, and disciplinary actions to ensure the integrity of sport in India.

Challenges in Sports Governance

Despite progress, Indian sports governance faces multiple challenges:

1. Weak Organisational Structure: Many federations have executive committees that simultaneously manage governance and day-to-day operations, leading to inefficiency and conflicts of interest. Disputes among rival bodies in the same sport, such as the conflict between Hockey India and the Indian Hockey Federation, have caused administrative paralysis.
2. Lack of Accountability and Transparency: Opaque financial dealings and arbitrary decision-making have led to corruption, nepotism, and mismanagement. The 2010 Commonwealth Games scam is a notorious example of large-scale corruption. Moreover, in 2012, the IOA was suspended by the International Olympic Committee for electing members with pending criminal charges, forcing Indian athletes to compete under the IOC flag at the Winter Olympics.
3. Political and Third-Party Interference: Sports federations often have office bearers from political or business backgrounds rather than sports professionals. This politicisation affects fair governance and has led to actions from international bodies, such as FIFA suspending the All India Football Federation for “third-party interference”.
4. Policy Duplication: Overlapping government schemes like the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan and the Fit India Movement both provide sports equipment to schools, causing inefficiencies and resource wastage.
5. Under-Investment: India’s sports budget remains low compared to countries like China, resulting in inadequate infrastructure, limited grassroots outreach, and poor training facilities.
6. Illicit Activities: The Indian sports arena has been plagued by doping scandals, match-fixing, and money laundering. The 2013 Indian Premier League spot-fixing case is a prominent example that severely damaged the country’s cricketing reputation.
7. Sexual Harassment and Athlete Welfare: Many sports bodies lack effective mechanisms to protect athletes from harassment. Without proper Internal Complaints Committees, athletes remain vulnerable, affecting their mental health and performance.

Role of Athletes in Administration

In recent years, there has been a growing call to involve former athletes in sports administration.

Benefits of Athletes in Administration

• Athletes bring valuable domain expertise, understanding the challenges of training and competition firsthand.
• They enjoy the trust and respect of current players and coaches, which can foster better cooperation.
• Their presence can shift focus towards athlete welfare and reduce political interference.
• Former athletes tend to promote athlete-centric policies for better training facilities, mental health support, and fair selection processes.

Drawbacks

• Administrative roles require skills in management, negotiation, and long-term strategic planning, which may not align with the skillsets of former players.
• Unlike on-field decisions, administrative outcomes take time to manifest, requiring patience and diplomatic skills.
• Back-channel negotiations with sponsors, governments, and international bodies often demand tact and experience beyond sporting achievements.

Conclusion

India’s sporting aspirations are immense, with athletes making significant marks on the global stage in multiple disciplines. However, systemic governance issues often impede progress. The journey towards a flourishing sports culture requires a transparent, accountable, and professional governance framework. 

By balancing autonomy with oversight, investing in grassroots and infrastructure, and fostering inclusive leadership, India can unlock the full potential of its athletes and proudly establish itself as a sporting powerhouse.