LET'S TALK SPORTS LAW

[Author: Shwetha Murali, Sports Psychologist Intern, Tamil Nadu Centre for Sports Science, Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu]

---

Introduction

The National Sports Governance Act, 2025, which has been passed by Parliament, has been hailed as a landmark attempt to change how sporting bodies are run in India. The act establishes national sports bodies, codes of ethics, and grievance redressal mechanisms in a serious effort to align our sports governance with international standards, especially the Olympic and Paralympic Charters. The act has come at the right time, amidst governance failures leading to frequent suspensions of federations—from wrestling to football. The pressing question remains – will the act just render itself as checkboxes for compliance, or will the reforms, if implemented, truly safeguard the holistic well-being of the athletes?

Ethical Codes and Athlete Safeguarding

The act mandates all sporting bodies to frame a code of ethics for athletes, coaches, officials, and sponsors. This code serves as a psychological contract, helping athletes be informed and safeguarded against abuse of any kind. Many studies point out the fact that when people perceive higher organizational support and justice, they experience lower stress and higher motivation. We need accountability systems in place like in the UK, where adherence to ethical codes directly links to funding [Sports Governance Academy—A Code for Sports Governance]. India can adopt similar accountability mechanisms to ensure compliance with ethical standards.

Grievance Redressal: From Protection to Empowerment

A National Sports Tribunal and grievance cells are established by the act to resolve disputes. The elephant in the room is the issue that many athletes don’t voice out the wrongdoings, often fearing bias and retaliation from those in power. And this further leads to learned helplessness under prolonged exposure to stressors. Thus, we need proper whistleblower protection policies that must be integrated into implementation to protect the athletes. This will enhance the psychosocial safety climate too. In the USA, there is a SafeSport Center that independently looks into abuse complaints [U.S. Center for SafeSport], and Canada mandates training on safe sport practices for all stakeholders [Coaching Association of Canada—Safe Sport Training]. Our grievance mechanisms must break out of the bureaucratic chains and similarly implement such transparent procedures so that the grievance redressal process is athlete-centered and trauma-informed.

Representation That Builds Legitimacy: Athletes and Women in Governance

The inclusion of women and athlete representations on executive committees, as required by the act, is another step in the right direction. Hopefully, this doesn’t turn out to be an aspect of tokenism, and genuine representation and participation of athletes can pave the way to a better future for athletes in otherwise non-athlete-dominated governing bodies so far. The recent Athletes Commission of the Indian Olympic Committee, led by the likes of Olympians Sharath Kamal, Rani Rampal, PV Sindhu, etc., reinforced athlete-powered feedback and communication channels for better support [The Statesman—Athlete welfare in focus as IOA Commission announces key reforms]. Their approach is in line with the structure seen in countries like the USA and Australia, which often integrates former athletes into major consultancy and leadership roles. Initiatives like these are a major positive, helping India move in the direction of building legitimacy.

The act recognizes “sportspersons of outstanding merit” for governance roles. This striking move acknowledges athletes as leaders and policymakers, thus broadening their athletic identity beyond medals. This also allows for smoother post-retirement transitions, giving them continued purpose and meaningful contribution in the realm of sports. This pathway is in place in many of the developed nations, like the US and Australia, where it is quite common for athletes to lead governance structures, driving in the athlete’s voice in decision-making. For instance, in the USA, former athletes such as Edwin Moses (track and field icon) have chaired governing organizations, incorporating lived experience into anti-doping and ethics frameworks [USADA—Edwin Moses elected as Chair]. Such models demonstrate how incorporating former athletes within governance systems enhances trust, makes policy more responsive to ground realities, and symbolically assures younger athletes that their careers do not culminate with retirement from competition.

Autonomy and Oversight

The establishment of a National Sports Board with powers to cancel or suspend the recognition of federations is one of the act’s most contested provisions. The case of the suspension of the All-India Football Federation in 2022 by FIFA serves as a reminder that politically influenced governing bodies are not the way to go and that international charters stress that such national federations must remain autonomous [FIFA—Media Release: FIFA suspends All India Football Federation].

These suspensions hit the athletes the worst in terms of disrupted training and psychological strain on the field. Therefore, protecting the autonomy of the national federations is a mental health imperative, albeit a major legal challenge.

Transparent and Fair Elections as Motivators for Athletes

Independent election panels mandated by the act to oversee sport body elections are another important step to enhance athletes’ perception of fairness and procedural justice. For example, if a judoka is overlooked for selection, they may cope better if they trust the process to be fair and transparent, rather than suspecting bias. So, athletes are likely to remain motivated even in the face of unfavourable outcomes.

Inclusion of Para-Athletes and Grassroots Development

The act provides for a National Paralympic Committee that further widens the inclusion lens beyond gender to disability. The inclusion extends to involve the recognition of grassroots federations too, calling for regional equity. But for real impact, this initiative needs a lot of funding and cultural change. Our rural and para-athletes need the adequate resources and visibility; otherwise, they may just be symbolically included, yet materially excluded. Some of our local organizations, like Simply Sport Foundation, Victory Sports Foundation, Khel Khel Mein Foundation, and Sportz Village Foundation, to name a few, are leading examples of organizations that invest in grassroots athletes, nurturing sports talents from the ground up to elite pathways. Our sporting framework can draw inspiration from Japan’s Basic Act on Sport, which is a fantastic model that redefines sport as a universal right and establishes legal requirements for inclusion [Sasakawa Sports Foundation—The Basic Act on Sport]. It encourages equal opportunity for everyone—including women, older people, children, and persons with disabilities—through access to facilities, programs, safe environments, and lifelong sport opportunities. Some key implementation examples of this act include the establishment of community clubs and barrier-free sport facilities, enabling more mixed-ability participation, as well as the “I’m POSSIBLE” Paralympic education program, a legacy from the Tokyo 2020 Olympics.

Conclusion

The implementation of the National Sports Governance Act, 2025, is the much-needed reset in Indian sports governance, but its success depends on how it gives into shaping an athlete-centred, nurturing environment for our sportspersons, rooted in inclusion, dignity, and fairness, rather than just on legal compliance and tokenistic representation.

Ultimately, the governance reforms should recognize that athletes are humans too; they are not medal machines who operate in a vacuum. Therefore, to truly serve its purpose, our sports governance must cater to building systems where the athletes feel genuinely represented, safe, and respected, which will in turn nurture their best athletic self and performance. The IOC’s recent decision on September 3, 2025 [The Hindu—Indian sport regains Olympic Solidarity funding], to end the 11-month suspension of funding for Olympic Solidarity on grounds of “positive measures” under the revised system of governance serves to highlight starkly that athletes are the real gainers when governance reform is credible and timely.

*DISCLAIMER- The opinions and views expressed in this article are that of the Author(s) and not of SLRI- the expressed opinions do not, in any way whatsoever, reflect the views of any third party, including any institution/organisation that the Author(s) is/are currently associated to or was/were associated to in the past. Furthermore, the expressions are solely for informational and educational purposes, and must not be deemed to constitute any kind of advice. The hyperlinks in this blog might take you to webpages operated by third parties- SLRI does not guarantee or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any information, data, opinions, advice, statements, etc. on these webpages.

Preferred Citation: Shwetha Murali, Athlete-Centred Governance: A Psychosocial Lens on the National Sports Governance Bill 2025, Sports Law Review India, available at <https://sportslawreviewindia.blog/2025/09/16/athlete-centred-governance-a-psychosocial-lens-on-the-national-sports-governance-act-2025/> Published on 16 September 2025.