Ministry of Sports applauds UAE Chess Federation's pioneering initiative to include resident members in Board of Directors
This marks a qualitative shift in the way in which sports federation boards are formed, reinforcing the principle of involving all segments of society in the decision-making process, aligning with the vision of the UAE's wise leadership. It also lays the foundation for a new model that responds to the precise needs of the current development phase in the national sports sector.
The Ministry of Sports affirmed that the UAE Chess Federation's experience constitutes a historic milestone in the nation's sports governance development journey. The new system will be adopted as a pilot model within a well-studied, integrated approach aimed at assessing the institutional and technical impact of this initiative on the federation's performance and its ability to achieve its goals. This includes evaluating decision-making efficiency, diversity of expertise, speed of initiative implementation, as well as internal governance effectiveness.
Based on the outcomes of this experience, a comprehensive analysis will be conducted to help shape future policies for the development of board formation mechanisms across other federations. The approach may be gradually generalised depending on the extent to which the intended objectives are achieved, in alignment with the principles of professionalism, sustainability, and inclusivity within the sports sector.
The Ministry considers the inclusion of resident members in the boards of sports federations as a practical embodiment of the values of openness, tolerance, and diversity. This inclusion enhances the contribution of the residents to sports development by harnessing their expertise and talents, further reinforcing the role of sports as a national tool for development, social integration, and empowerment.
This experience also highlights the need to integrate elite talents into sports leadership, particularly in specialised areas such as sports marketing, strategic planning, technical analysis, and the adoption of modern technologies. The Ministry believes that involving members with advanced expertise serves as an institutional enabler for achieving performance excellence. This step aligns with the Ministry's vision to develop the administrative structure of sports federations and instate qualified professionals capable of transforming these entities into pioneering institutions characterised by responsible decision-making, agility, and innovation.
This initiative highlights the Ministry's efforts to instil a robust governance culture as the guiding framework for all institutional processes within the sports sector. Moreover, the adoption of the electoral list system is considered a significant organisational advancement, reinforcing the commitment of sports bodies to the principles of integrity, transparency, specialisation, and administrative integration.
The Ministry views governance not merely as a regulatory tool, but as a comprehensive approach that supports the development of stronger partnerships with all sports institutions. It helps foster a collaborative working environment and contributes to empowering these entities by enhancing their ability to identify talent, increase the number of active sports participants, and improve overall sports performance efficiency.
The Ministry emphasises that its support for sports federations goes beyond financial or logistical assistance, extending to the development of effective administrative models, ensuring comprehensive governance, and empowering the board of directors by offering them institutional innovation tools.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
12 hours ago
- The National
Will nations agree treaty to cut plastic production?
Talks to agree the first global treaty on combating plastic pollution are set to begin on Tuesday, and limiting plastic production is a key point of contention. Dozens of countries, campaign groups and researchers say that legally binding cuts to plastic production, which is running at about 460 million tonnes a year, are the only way to deal with the problem. However, many other nations, including producers of fossil fuels that are used to make most plastics, want the treaty to instead focus on improving the collection and recycling of plastic waste. The discussions in Geneva, scheduled to run until 14 August, are titled INC-5.2 because they are the second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, part of the UN Environment Assembly. More than 170 nations and hundreds of organisations are taking part in the talks, which ended in gridlock over the issue of production limits during the first part of the fifth session, in Busan, South Korea, in late 2024. Beyond waste management Prof Bethanie Almroth, co-coordinator of the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, which is pressing for production limits, said studies had shown that improved waste management 'will not suffice' in dealing with plastic. 'The amount of plastic being produced is not manageable by the infrastructure that exists or will exist in the future,' said Prof Almroth, a plastic pollution researcher at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. According to figures published by the World Economic Forum, the amount of plastic produced each year could rise to 1.7 billion tonnes by 2060. Prof Almroth said a proposed 40 per cent cut in annual plastic production by 2040, put forward by Rwanda and Peru, would be insufficient to prevent continued plastic pollution. Environmental organisations have previously called for a 75 per cent reduction in production. Economic vs environmental costs Pollution is created across the life cycle of plastic, including during production, so improvements in recycling would not be enough to end environmental harms, according to Prof Almroth. Concerns have been raised over lobbying by fossil fuel and plastic producers at gatherings to finalise the treaty. Prof Almroth said there was disinformation and misrepresentation of scientific findings, making it harder for delegates to come to decisions. She acknowledged that a shift away from fossil fuels and their use to produce plastics would have an economic cost, but said 'the costs of inaction will be greater' and efforts to find alternatives would create new business models. While describing herself as 'realistically optimistic' about the outcome, Prof Almroth said the way that negotiations were proceeding by consensus could derail efforts to cut plastic production. 'There's a risk of watering down negotiations to the point where the treaty might lack effectiveness,' she said. 'Plastic pollution is urgent. Delaying further would allow the problem to grow.' Groups have formed during the negotiations, notably the 'high-ambition coalition', which includes more than 60 nations such as Norway, Rwanda, Peru and the UK that support a legally binding treaty with production limits. By contrast the 'like-minded group', which contains nations such as Saudi Arabia and China, is pressing for a treaty that focuses on dealing with plastic waste. Among the organisations pushing for a treaty that mandates production limits is Greenpeace Mena. Its lead plastics campaigner, Farah Al Hattab, said during a media briefing that plastic was 'strangling our soil, our water, our air'. While calling for 'ambitious objectives' on the reuse of plastics to be adopted, she suggested that a focus simply on ways to improve how plastic waste was dealt with risked the adoption of 'fake solutions'. 'This treaty should be legally binding,' she added. 'Other treaties that are not legally binding have problems with implementation.' In the Mena region, communities could look back to traditions to find ways of cutting out plastic, Ms Al Hattab said. 'We can stop using single-use plastic. Our ancestors used containers from glass and clay,' she said. 'If we promote clean-up initiatives, we can help reduce plastic pollution, but this takes time and money.' An estimated 20 million tones of plastic ends up as waste in the environment each year, according to reports. Studies have shown that this can be harmful to a wide range of wildlife including turtles and seabirds in the UAE. Pieces of plastic waste break down into microplastics, which have been found around the globe, including in polar regions far away from large human populations, and in human tissue. Microplastic impact on health A study published in Nature in July indicated that more than 16,000 chemicals have been used in plastics, at least 4,200 of which could be harmful to humans or the environment. The study reported that potentially harmful chemicals were present even in food packaging. One of the study's authors, Dr Zhanyun Wang, a scientist at Swiss research institute Empa, said when the study was released that to create 'a safe and sustainable circular economy for plastics' it was necessary to simplify their chemical composition. The British Plastics Federation, a UK trade association that represents organisations such as plastics producers and recyclers, said it favoured 'an ambitious treaty that covers the whole life cycle of plastics'. While stating that plastic 'has no place in the open environment', the organisation added that it should continue to be used 'where it provides the best environmental outcome and offers clear benefits'. 'Plastic has a strategically important role in vital infrastructure, such as the distribution of fresh food and water, in developing clean energy and in defence,' the federation said in a statement. While it said it would continue to 'provide every support required' to the British government team at the conference, the federation added that plastic helps to reduce carbon emissions by limiting the weight of transported items and by cutting food waste. 'The treaty needs to be impactful while not hampering the ability of the UK, and the world, to be innovative, achieve net zero and avoid the worst effects of climate change,' its statement added. The federation did not respond to an enquiry about whether it supported limits on plastic production.
The National
19 hours ago
- The National
UAE and Jordan lead 59th aid airdrop into Gaza
The UAE and Jordan carried out the 59th airdrop operation of humanitarian aid into Gaza on Friday, alongside seven aircraft from France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. The efforts were part of Operation Chivalrous Knight 3, which aims to deliver food and relief supplies to the most affected areas in the strip. Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, spoke by phone with Ayman Safadi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The two sides discussed the latest developments of the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, and ways to enhance joint co-ordination in relief efforts. UAE aid to Gaza The UAE has provided more than $1.5 billion in humanitarian support to Gaza since the start of the war with Israel, authorities revealed on Friday. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs set out the scale of the country's commitment to the enclave and pledged to continue to deliver support amid 'continuing catastrophic conditions'. According to the UN's financial tracking Service, the Emirates has delivered more aid to Gaza than any other country. The assistance includes providing medical support to 72,280 patients at hospitals in the UAE and the floating hospital in Al Arish, Egypt. In addition, over 78,000 tonnes od food, medicine, and emergency supplies have been distributed in co-ordination with international humanitarian organisations. At least 60,249 Palestinians have been killed and 147,089 wounded since the war with Israel began in October 2023, according to the Hamas-run Gazan health ministry.
The National
a day ago
- The National
The Khor Abdullah waterway: Navigation deal or border surrender?
A 2012 agreement between Iraq and Kuwait regulating navigation in the shared Khor Abdullah waterway has triggered intense debate inside Iraq ever since, with critics warning it blurs maritime boundaries and threatens national sovereignty. Some opponents are calling to annul the deal, while others support renegotiation to safeguard Iraq's rights. Meanwhile, Kuwait maintains that its maritime boundary with Iraq, including navigation rights in Khor Abdullah, is firmly grounded in international law. Kuwaiti officials have repeatedly stressed that any attempt to revoke this agreement unilaterally is invalid and unacceptable. The Kuwaiti Ministry of Foreign Affairs has lodged formal protests and called on Iraq to honour its commitments under binding international treaties, reaffirming Kuwait's sovereignty over its territorial waters and its right to shared navigation in Khor Abdullah. The issue of land and maritime borders between Iraq and Kuwait is highly sensitive among Iraqis with many viewing the border demarcation unfairly imposed by the US Security Council after driving Saddam Hussein 's army out of its neighbour in 1991 and say the country's weakened state at the time was exploited. It is equally sensitive from the Kuwaiti point of view due to the 1990 invasion, with concerns about Iraqi over-reach. The controversy has pitted Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al Sudani against the public, with critics accusing him of compromising the country's rights to Kuwait to secure regional support as he eyes a second term in office in November's national election. Some have gone as far as accusing Iraqi officials involved in the border negotiations of receiving bribes from Kuwait, without providing substantial evidence. Both Iraq and Kuwait claim exclusive ownership of the narrow canal, which curves around Kuwait's Bubiyan and Warba islands on one side and Iraq's Al Faw Peninsula on the other. Iraqis say it is named after a famous Basra fisherman, Abdullah Al Timimi, while Kuwaitis say its name derives from the second ruler of Kuwait, Abdullah bin Sabah, who ruled from 1762 to 1814. In early 2022, Iraq closed off the chapter of Kuwait compensation, paying its final war reparations, settling the $52.4 billion of claims made for damage inflicted during the 1990 invasion. What is the agreement and its purpose? Three years after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 833, which determined the land border between the two. However, the delineation of the maritime border was left to the countries themselves. In 2012, Baghdad and Kuwait signed the agreement and it was ratified in 2013 by the parliament in Baghdad. It aimed to regulate maritime traffic, environmental protection and safety within the estuary that forms Iraq's only gateway to the Arabian Gulf. The deal gives each country the right to control navigation and safety enforcement. It stipulates that the agreement 'shall remain in effect indefinitely' but can be mutually terminated with six months' notice. This also applies to amending it. Critics' arguments Critics – mainly legislators, independent politician and experts – argue that the terms of the accord implicitly draw a boundary, warning it could prejudice future maritime border negotiations and impose access controls on Iraqi ships, requiring Kuwaiti approval and fees. Amir Abdul Jabar, who served as transport minister from 2008 to 2010 and is one of the strongest opponents of the agreement, argues it is meant to delineate a maritime border rather than regulate navigation. Although the accord states that the agreement 'shall have no effect upon the boundary' between Iraq and Kuwait as demarcated pursuant to the UN Security Council Resolution 833 in 1993 at the creek, it gives Kuwait more control beyond that deep in the Gulf, Mr Abdul Jabar said. Article 2 of the agreement explains the term 'waterway' as the area from the point where the maritime channel at Khor Abdullah meets the international boundary between the points 156 and 157 heading south to the point 162 set by the Resolution 833 'thence to the beginning of the maritime channel at the entrance to Khor Abdullah'. 'So, the definition of the waterway in the agreement didn't stop at the 162 point – the one set by the UN Security General resolution,' Mr Abdul Jabar said. Article 4 stipulates that 'each party shall exercise its sovereignty over that part of the waterway which lies within its territorial water'. The essence of the objection, Mr Abdul Jabar said, is that it must not be applied on the area beyond the point 162 as Article 2 stipulates. 'How is it possible to divide the area beyond the point 162?' Mr Abdul Jabar said. 'We are not objecting to the [833] resolution even though it's unfair, but the government and parliament of 2012-2013 brought a new disaster [in signing this deal],' he added, warning that Iraq could lose future maritime entitlement to deeper Gulf waters and its natural resources known as the Exclusive Economic Zone. Mr Abdul Jabar had filed a lawsuit against Mr Al Sudani for 'blocking the court's ruling', by refusing to have copies of it deposited to the UN and the International Maritime Organisation. Ruling and controversy In September 2023, Iraq's Federal Supreme Court invalidated the law ratifying the agreement, ruling that it violated the Iraqi Constitution by lacking the required two thirds parliamentary majority for international treaties. Parliament had passed it by simple majority only. Shortly after the ruling, the GCC and US issued a joint statement in which they called on the Iraqi government to 'ensure that the agreement remains in force'. The Iraqi government has assured Kuwait that Iraq is committed to all its international agreements. Afterwards, Mr Al Sudani and President Abdul Latif Rashid have independently sought to reverse the ruling. These requests were withdrawn early this month and the agreement was sent back to parliament to approve in a two-thirds majority. It was a sigh of relief for the opponents. Many of them are now asking to annul the agreement by rejecting it inside parliament, while others are seeking to renegotiate it with an Iraqi team including experts, not only politicians. Protests across Iraq have continued, to reject the agreement in its current form. A public campaign is also set to be launched to collect signatures for a petition for the UN Security Council. Fadi Al Shammari, a political adviser to Mr Al Sudani, confirmed the Khor Abdullah agreement aims to regulate navigation and has nothing to do with border demarcation. 'Iraqi land is sacred, and there will be no leniency or compromise over any inch of it under any pretext,' Mr Al Shammari said, claiming that campaigns opposing the agreement are 'driven by political and electoral agendas'. Iraqis are divided about the agreement, although many of the Iran-backed political parties and armed groups are echoing the government stance. In an interview with a local satellite channel in May, the leader of the Asaib Ahl Al Haq group, Qais Al Khazali, blamed Saddam Hussein's banned Baath party for seeking to discredit the agreement by portraying it as 'giving up Iraq's borders with Kuwait'. 'Saddam was the one who sold it [the border] when he recognised resolution 833", a UN motion which set the land and maritime borders, he said. It is still unclear if the parliament will ratify the agreement or whether it will be left to the next parliament after national elections in November national elections. Kuwait is also in dispute with Iran over their maritime border and Al Durra offshore gasfield in the Arabian Gulf. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia say they have 'exclusive rights' to Al Durra and called on Iran to validate its claim by demarcating its maritime borders. Iran previously claimed a stake in the field and said a Kuwaiti-Saudi agreement signed last year to develop the field was illegal.
