
National Sports Bill: How It's Different From National Sports Code
The mostly long-serving administrators were and still are often accused of indulging in power struggles, infighting, financial misappropriation and showing a distinct lack of intent to overcome any of these issues.
But with the new bill, accountability will be in place through a National Sports Board, a National Sports Tribunal and the National Sports Election Panel.
All of this took shape over months of dialogue that current Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya undertook with stakeholders, soon after taking charge last year.
Once the bill was finalised, Mandaviya gave due credit to Maken, his political opponent from the Congress party, for "doing good work in shaping the National Sports Code, 2011" which was in operation till now.
"The National Sports Development Code of India, 2011 established good governance practices for sports bodies, essential for healthy development of sports in the country," stated the objectives of the new bill.
Here's a look at the timeline of how the code turned into a bill with significant changes.
The Journey: ========= *In 2011, the Ministry prepared Draft National Sports Development Bill and placed it before Cabinet for approval. However, it was met with vehement opposition due to strict capping of age and tenure for administrators.
*In July 2013, the Ministry prepared a revised Draft National Sports Development Bill and placed it in public domain to invite suggestions and comments. However, this Bill was not pursued and a year later, the Delhi High Court upheld the Sports Code 2011.
*In 2015, a Working Group was constituted for re-drafting of National Sports Development Code, 2011. But the inclusion of Indian Olympic Association top brass in this group was challenged in the Delhi High Court as a case of conflict of interest.
*In 2017, a Committee was constituted under then sports secretary Injeti Srinivas, to prepare the '(Draft) National Code for Good Governance in Sports, 2017'. Olympic gold medal-winning shooter Abhinav Bindra, and other sports greats like Anju Bobby George, and Prakash Padukone, along with then then IOA head Narinder Batra were among the members in the committee.
The Draft Sports Code was also challenged in the Delhi High Court, which ordered that committee's report be submitted to it in a sealed cover.
*In 2019, the Ministry constituted an Expert Committee under Justice (Retd.) Mukundakam Sharma to review the Draft Sports Code 2017 and "suggest measures for making it acceptable to all the stakeholders".
That same year, the Delhi High Court stayed the constitution of this committee, an order that is in effect till date.
*In October 2024, the Draft National Sports Governance Bill was released to the public for comments and suggestions. There were extensive consultation sessions held with the IOA, the National Sports Federations, athletes, coaches, legal experts and even private bodies that are involved in athlete management. The bill was also shared with the International Olympic Committe and International Federations including World Athletics, FIFA, and the International Hockey Federation (FIH) among others.
The ministry received "over 700 responses" as part of the feedback from various stakeholders, including general public before it finally made its way to the Parliament.
The differences with Sports Code: ===================== *Age Cap: While the Sports Code capped the age of administrators at 70, the new bill allows an office-bearer to complete his/her tenure if they were less than 70 at the time of filing nominations. A further relaxation of another five years has been made for contesting elections if the international statutes and byelaws allow for it in the concerned sports body.
*Tenure: The Sports Code allowed three terms with a cooling off period after two terms for the President and two terms for Treasurer and Secretary. The new sports bill allows office-bearers (President, Secretary General and Treasurer) to serve three consecutive terms of a maximum of 12 years and remain eligible for election to the Executive Committee after a cooling off period.
"This has been done to ensure continuity and also to keep competent people within the system," a sports ministry source said.
*Executive Committee: The sports code had no provision for mandatory women's representation in the committee whose strength was capped at 15. The new bill mandates that at least four members of the EC must be women along with two sportspersons of outstanding merit.
*Regulatory Body: The sports code had no provisions for a regulatory body to oversee NSFs, leaving the power to recognise or derecognise in the hands of the sports ministry. But the sports governance bill outlines the creation of a National Sports Board which will fulfill this role.
*The National Sports Tribunal, which will adjudicate sporting disputes, the National Sports Election Panel to oversee polls in NSFs and the Ethics Commission were not a part of the Sports Code. All these bodies will have a significant role to play once the bill becomes an act.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
New self-confidence in India post Sindoor: PM Modi before Parliament debate
GANGAIKONDA CHOLAPURAM/NEW DELHI: A day ahead of the parliamentary debate on the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor , PM Narendra Modi on Sunday reasserted that the precision strikes on terror dens in Pakistan was India's message that there are no safe havens for terrorists and their masters. India places the highest priority on its national security and the operation has created a new awakening and a new self-confidence across the country, Modi said at an event in Tamil Nadu's Gangaikonda Cholapuram to honour Chola emperor Rajendra Chola. The world witnessed India's firm and decisive response to the threat against its sovereignty during Operation Sindoor and it has sent a clear message, there is no safe haven for terrorists and enemies of the nation, he said, setting the tone for the govt's response for the debate in Parliament, starting in Lok Sabha on Monday. Oppn plans to point to big terror attacks under 'PM Modi's watch' The upcoming discussion in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on the attack and the operation comes as a significant opportunity for the govt to reaffirm its strong stance on national security and counter-terrorism. The debate - after a first week of disruption of Parliament's Monsoon session - is likely to be a fiery one between the ruling alliance and the opposition as they prepare to lock horns over the issues steeped in national security and foreign policy imperatives. The two sides have consented to a marathon 16-hour debate in each House, which invariably stretches longer in practice. Union defence minister Rajnath Singh is likely to initiate the debate immediately after the question hour in Lok Sabha. Sources said home minister Amit Shah, defence minister Rajnath Singh, and external affairs minister S Jaishankar will be speaking on the issues amid indications that the PM may make an intervention to convey his govt's "robust" stand against terrorism . Leaders of opposition in LS and RS - Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge - may lead the charge against the govt along with Samajwadi Party's Akhilesh Yadav, besides a host of others. Congress , however, plans to attack the govt and particularly PM Modi on what BJP has claimed to be their calling card over a decade, and have used incessantly to target Congress over national security. More than Operation Sindoor, the opposition would be looking to hammer home that the country has been extremely unsafe from cross border threats, pointing to repeated big terror attacks under Modi's watch, from Uri to Pahalgam. This will also put Shah in the oppositions crosshairs. It is here that the opposition plans to undercut Modi's claim on national security. As has been seen since the terror attack, Congress and opposition have been pointing to the fact that the terrorists singled out the tourists by religion to execute them - a point that the opposition would have been reluctant to touch in the past for fear of polarisation. Congress ahead of the debate raised the issue of US President Donald Trump's claims of halting Operation Sindoor. Party leader Jairam Ramesh on Sunday said since May 10, Trump has claimed "26 times" that he stopped the operation by "threatening to cut off trade with India, and claimed that five fighter jets may have been shot down". Ramesh on X said "even though Congress had been demanding a special two-day session of Parliament immediately after Operation Sindoor was abruptly halted that demand was ignored. "Nevertheless, better late than never," he said.


The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Muslim hawker assaulted in Meerut; attempt to create fear, says opposition
After a Muslim cloth peddler was brutally assaulted at Fatehpur Narayan village, under Kithor police station limits, in Meerut district, opposition parties alleged on Sunday that the incident was a targeted attack designed to create fear. While villagers and police claimed Arif was mistaken for a thief, the victim's wife alleged that they were being forced to modify the complaint by the police. 'We have submitted a petition; the case is yet to be registered. My husband, who was selling clothes, was beaten, and now we are being pressured to change the petition by the Sub-Inspector,' said Tausima, the victim's wife, in a viral video. The Hindu reached out to the Meerut police, including the Circle Officer, but failed to get any response. Mob attack The incident happened on July 26. The victim, along with one companion, was selling clothes in the village when 10-15 people gathered and began calling him a thief, demanded his Aadhar card, and proceeded to beat him up. He was taken to Meerut Medical College for treatment. 'This incident shows that there is a complete breakdown of law and order in the state. No one has the right to take the law into their hands; some people emboldened by the dispensation are attempting to create a Jangal Raj kind of situation in U.P.; it is a lynching attempt that aims to create fear,' said Imran Masood, Lok Sabha MP and a senior Congress leader. Lok Sabha MP from Ghazipur, Afzal Ansari, said, 'I condemn this incident, it is clear that the accused have no fear of the administration and rule of law. They know no proper action will be taken, and this encourages them to attack poor Muslims.'


Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Abhishek to head to Delhi as TMC intensifies SIR stir
Kolkata: national general secretary is expected to reach Delhi this week as the party intensifies its stir in Parliament, demanding an assurance from the Centre "on the floor of the House" that the special intensive revision (SIR) in Bihar will be discussed. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Trinamool Congress has been consistently opposing SIR, questioning Election Commission's powers to conduct citizenship checks and disenfranchise voters. The party has said SIR requirements mirror Section 3 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which makes the exercise "NRC in disguise." Over the last week, the party has been hamstrung by the absence of its floor leaders in Lok Sabha. Trinamool's leader in Lok Sabha Sudip Bandyopadhyay and senior MP Saugata Roy are not in Delhi due to health reasons. The party's chief whip in Lok Sabha, Kalyan Banerjee, is representing Bengal govt in cases and shuttling between Supreme Court and Calcutta High Court. On Friday, the party's deputy Lok Sabha leader Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar attended the all-party meeting convened by Speaker Om Birla. Banerjee is likely to remain in Delhi and work on party strategy. The Diamond Harbour MP, who was part of Centre's outreach abroad after Pahalgam attack, is also likely to be a keynote speaker if Operation Sindoor discussions take place in Parliament. A senior MP said: "Trinamool is not opposed to discussions on Operation Sindoor. In fact, we want some answers. But this cannot be at the expense of SIR. Here we are talking of mass disenfranchisement of people who had voted in the 2024 Lok Sabha, based on arbitrary reasoning. We want a clear assurance from the Centre on the floor of the house that SIR will be discussed threadbare in Parliament."