NEW DELHI: Football Delhi president Shaji Prabhakaran has claimed that All India Football Federation (AIFF) spends more than Rs 3 crore annually in fighting legal cases and that such a big expenditure is not “justified”.
In a letter to AIFF president Praful Patel, urging him to hold elections of the national body without delay, Prabhakaran said the current legal team has not brought any progress to the election-related case pending before the Supreme Court since 2017.
“…we should not be spending money on taking second opinion rather we should hire a new set of legal teams with 10% of the current legal budget,” he wrote in the letter, dated May 7, and accessed by PTI.
“Annual expense of Rs 3 crore plus on legal matters is significantly high and not justified for AIFF. Many saved here (by reducing legal budget) should be spent in organising national youth championships, youth leagues and youth national teams exposure and camps.
“The current set of legal teams have not brought any progress to the case in the last three years. (If) you personally want this case to be settled at the earliest, a new set of lawyers will be given a maximum three months to settle this case.”
PTI notes that in its executive committee meeting held in Kolkata earlier this month, the AIFF had decided to take opinion of a senior advocate on the way forward, regarding the holding of elections after the three-member committee set up earlier to look into the matter submitted its report to the General Body.
Patel completed three terms and 12 years as AIFF president in December 2020, the maximum permitted to a national sports federation chief under the Sports Code. The AIFF, however, did not hold the elections, citing a pending petition in the Supreme Court regarding its constitution.
The AIFF moved an application in the Supreme Court only a month before its elections were due, seeking certain clarifications on the status of its constitution, which was under scrutiny in the apex court since 2017. The case is still pending.
Prabhakaran also suggested to Patel that the AIFF be placed under a normalisation committee of the FIFA to run its affairs till elections are held. It bears noting that Patel sits at the powerful FIFA Council.
In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court last month, the Union Sports Ministry had said that Patel has no mandate to continue as AIFF president as he has already served three terms and the national body should hold elections without further delay.
“The growing criticism is impacting football in a big way, and we should not allow this situation to further deteriorate where court might appoint an administrator like in few other NSFs,” the head of Delhi’s football body said.
“…you as a president of the organisation has a greater responsibility to save AIFF and football.
However, AIFF general secretary Kushal Das has refuted Prabhakaran’s contention, including the expenses incurred on legal matters.
Das told IANS, “I don’t know why he (Prabhakaran) is saying this. AIFF is not spending so much money on legal matters. The legal and professional expenses including the PR agency are much lower than what Shaji has given. And above all, every detail is mentioned on the AIFF website.”
“Legal cost is only one crore and the total cost is Rs 2.23 crore. There are many cases from state associations also, so the figure he has given is not up to the level,” he added.
Further, commenting on Prabhakaran’s suggestion that FIFA constitute a normalisation committee, Das claimed such a move was not in the best interest of the game in the country.
“I don’t know how he can say like that. Perhaps he does not understand the consequences of the normalisation committee. If FIFA appoints a normalization committee then India cannot play any matches. Election of AIFF is sub-judice now, so we have to wait for that,” Das argued.
An AIFF official though, speaking to Telegraph India, countered Das’s claim. “FIFA appoints a normalisation committee after taking into confidence all the stakeholders and it doesn’t mean derecognising football activities in a particular country. It’s not a ban,” said unnamed official pointed out.
