E-Paper
Supreme Court to hear AIFF’s review petition on Friday
The federation approached the top court with a last-minute request for a hearing as it pointed out two provisions that runs contrary to the FIFA statute
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday the All India Football Federation (AIFF) seeking changes in its draft constitution cleared by the top court days before the document is to be placed for approval at the General Body meeting to be held on Sunday.
The federation approached the top court with a last-minute request for a hearing as it pointed out two provisions that runs contrary to the FIFA statute and could incur sanctions on the national body, if cleared.
The objections pertained to the judgment requiring court’s approval for effecting any amendment to the AIFF constitution and the prohibition on members of AIFF to simultaneously hold posts in state federations.
A bench of justices PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar agreed to take up the matter on Friday directing a copy of the documents filed by AIFF to be supplied to the amicus curiae and senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan along with advocate Samar Bansal.
The matter was mentioned by senior advocate Sidharth Luthra appearing for AIFF who pointed out that the federation is seeking clarification on the two provisions alone. He submitted a chart to the court showing how the judgment runs contrary to the FIFA statute and the recommendations made by former Supreme Court judge L Nageswara Rao, who was instrumental in preparing the draft constitution.
The document supplied by AIFF said, “Any requirement mandating external approval or imposing conditions on the AIFF’s authority to amend its constitution would be contrary to the principle of independence guaranteed under Article 19 of the FIFA Statutes,” while referring to Article 23 of the draft constitution making top court’s nod a prerequisite for carrying out any amendment. It further said, “Article 19(1) of FIFA Statutes stipulates that each member association must manage its affairs independently and without undue influence from third parties.” Non-compliance with this rule can lead to imposition of sanctions on AIFF, it added.
Luthra further pointed out that the condition for prior court approval was not recommended by justice Rao, who recommended no change to the original text of the provision which allows amendment to AIFF Constitution on a resolution passed and adopted by a 75% majority of the members present and entitled to vote at a Special General Meeting of the General Body.
The AIFF further urged the court to consider allowing members of AIFF to holds posts in state bodies as well. It said that Justice Rao’s note did not provide for such a restriction but the same was restored in the Supreme Court judgment, based on request of various stakeholders.
The chart prepared by AIFF shows, “The reinstatement (of this bar) in Article 25 poses a significant functional and structural challenge, as it obliges members to make an exclusive choice between retaining their seat in the National Federation or continuing as office-bearers in their respective state federations.”
It cited the example of FIFA’s governance structure, where the FIFA Council comprises a President, eight Vice Presidents. The Vice Presidents concurrently hold office as Presidents of their respective Continental Confederations.
“Such a restriction is inherently impractical, as it disrupts the institutional linkage and continuity between the state and national bodies…. Furthermore, the adoption of Article 25 will have a cascading effect, creating governance and administrative difficulties. It will disrupt coordination, reduce accountability and would further cause major management problems across the federal structure.”
It was on September 19, a bench of justices Narasimha along with justice Joymalya Bagchi approved the draft AIFF Constitution and directed the same to be adopted by the General Body at its meeting to be held on October 12.
The court passed the order while dealing with an appeal filed by AIFF in 2017 challenging a decision of the Delhi high court which set aside the AIFF elections holding it to be not in compliance with the National Sports Code (NSC) of 2011.
The top court had in November 2017 stayed the HC order as it formed a committee of administrators to run the AIFF till the global football body FIFA decided to suspend the membership of AIFF. Fresh elections were held and an Executive Committee took charge and the task of finalising the Constitution of AIFF was given to justice Rao.
The court noted the unifying power of sport that promotes inclusiveness and reminded the state of its Constitutional duty to ensure that sporting facilities and opportunities flourish with institutional efficiency, integrity, professionalism, and expertise.
It went on to introduce path-breaking changes to the AIFF governance structure and functions in the interest of football’s better future. The court incorporated participation of 15 eminent players as members of the General Body, tweaked provisions to enable women representation, and directed state federations to conform to the model proposed for AIFF.
