Union Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya on Wednesday (July 23, 2025) introduced the National Sports Governance Bill in the Lok Sabha.
“…as a part of the preparatory activities for the bidding of Summer Olympic Games 2036, it is imperative that the sports governance landscape undergoes a positive transformation to bring better outcomes, sporting excellence and aids in improved performance in major international competitions,” the bill’s statement of objectives reads.
Looked at in totality however, among the most far-reaching insertions in the Bill, if it comes into law, is firstly, the creation of a National Sports Board (NSB), which will have sweeping powers to lay down rules and oversee the functioning of federations, including the cash-rich BCCI. And secondly, the overarching ability of the Centre to restrict national team participation in the “national interest”.
Just these two proposals in the Bill, when clubbed together, is more than likely going to bring Indian sports governance in direct conflict with pretty much all major world governing sports institutions – the two most significant of which are the International Olympic Committee and FIFA.
Another striking feature of the Bill is the proposal for a National Sports Tribunal (NST), which will have the powers of a civil court and decide disputes ranging from selection to election involving federations and athletes. Once instituted, tribunal’s decisions can only be challenged in the Supreme Court.
PTI reports that the Bill makes some concessions on the issue of age cap for administrators by allowing those in the bracket of 70 to 75 to contest elections if the concerned international bodies’ statutes and byelaws allow for it. It is a departure from the existing National Sports Code that capped the age limit at 70.
All recognised national sports bodies would also come under the ambit of the Right to Information Act (RTI), something that the BCCI has vehemently opposed since it is not dependent on government funding.
“Now we have to study the bill, and we will have to see if we need to place it before the committee (apex council). We can only comment after that,” PTI quotes BCCI vice president and Rajya Sabha member Rajeev Shukla as having said outside Parliament.
“Obviously BCCI members will study the bill and its clauses and if put forth to any committee, they will study and then we will see what needs to be done. We will also have discussions with the government,” Shukla noted.
The ministry has insisted that the BCCI, which is now a part of the Olympic movement following cricket’s inclusion in the 2028 Los Angles Games roster, will have to comply with the provisions of the Bill once it becomes an Act.
Centre to decide appointments
Significantly, though not surprising, is the fact that the Centre has abrogated to itself the powers to determine the officials appointed to bodies like the NSB and NST.
Specific to the NSB, the appointments of the board’s constituents would be done based on the recommendations of a search-cum-selection committee. The selection committee would be made up of the Cabinet Secretary or Secretary Sports as chairperson, the director general of the Sports Authority of India, two sports administrators who have each served as the president or secretary general or treasurer of a national sports body and one eminent sportsperson who is a Dronacharya, or Khel Ratna or Arjuna awardee.
“…there is a felt need for a comprehensive legislation to improve the governance of the sports bodies and achieve better results in sports and reduce the disputes and litigation, inter alia, involving sports federations,” stated the objectives of the Bill.
“There is an imperative need to curb factionalism, and administrative interventions which adversely affects the organised development of sports and related activities in India and also for its better presentation before the international sports community,” it added.
The NSB will have the mandate to de-recognise a national body that fails to hold elections for its executive committee or has committed “gross irregularities in the election procedures.”
Failure to publish annual audited accounts or “misused, misapplied or misappropriated public funds” would also be liable for action by the NSB but it would be required to consult the concerned global body before making its move.
The Bill also provides for a National Sports Election Panel consisting of former members of the Election Commission of India or the State Election Commission or former chief electoral officers of the states or deputy election commissioners.
“(They) shall act as electoral officers to oversee the conduct of free and fair elections to the Executive Committees and the Athletes Committee of the National Sports Bodies,” the bill stated.
WADA conditions addressed
Mandaviya also introduced The National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill-2025 that seeks to incorporate the changes sought by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), which objected to “government interference” in the functioning of the country’s Anti-Doping Agency (NADA).
The Act was originally passed in 2022, but its implementation had to be put on hold due to objections raised by WADA.
WADA objected to the institution of a National Board for Anti-Doping in Sports, which was empowered to make recommendations to the government on anti-doping regulations. The board, which was to comprise a chairperson and two members appointed by the Central government, was also authorised to oversee the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) and even issue directions to it.
WADA rejected this provision as government interference in an autonomous body.
In the amended bill, the Board has been retained but without the powers to oversee NADA or the advisory role it was previously assigned.
Kalyan Chaubey not eligible to seek re-election
Per The Telegraph, the Bill makes All India Football Federation president Kalyan Chaubey ineligible if he wishes to seek re-election.
It says “A person shall not be qualified to contest for election or seek nomination to, the Executive Committee, unless… such person is a sportsperson of outstanding merit or, has previously served as a member of the Executive Committee for at least two full terms, if such person is contesting election for the position of the president or the secretary general or the treasurer…”
The former goalkeeper has not served two terms on the executive committee and did not earn a national cap despite being in the India squad during his playing days. Thus, he cannot be deemed a sportsperson of outstanding merit.
The AIFF elections hold interest vis-à-vis the sports administrators since it will be one of the first NSFs to be directly impacted once the Bill is enacted.
On April 30, the Supreme Court had reserved its verdict on the issue of finalisation of the federation’s draft constitution prepared by former apex court Judge L Nageswara Rao.
A Bench, comprising Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi, had heard a host of senior lawyers before reserving judgment.
Should the Supreme Court order precede the passage of the National Sports Governance Bill 2025, the apex court’s stipulated constitutional provisions will govern the eligibility conditions for the AIFF office-bearers’ elections.
However, if the Bill is enacted, the AIFF constitution must adopt its provisions, and the Bill will supersede any conflicting clauses within the AIFF constitution.
