The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) on Wednesday introduced a three-member ad-hoc committee, headed by its Executive Committee member Bhupinder Singh Bajwa, to run the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) following the newly-elected federation’s suspension.
Two days in the past, the Union Sports Ministry had requested the WFI to droop its actions following some arbitrary selections taken by its newly-elected president and requested the IOA to type a panel to run the WFI.
The IOA has named a three-member panel, additionally comprising Olympic gold medallist hockey participant M.M. Somaya and former National champion shuttler Manjusha Kanwar, and tasked it “with overseeing and supervising WFI’s operations, which include athlete selection, submitting entries for athletes to participate in international events, organising sports activities, handling bank accounts, managing the website, related responsibilities.”
Bajwa was a key member of the earlier ad-hoc committee that ran the WFI after the Ministry had requested former WFI president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh to step apart as some outstanding wrestlers introduced completely different allegations, together with sexual harassment, in opposition to the latter.
Even as Sanjay Singh, a detailed affiliate of the Brij Bhushan, was elected the brand new president of the WFI, three prime wrestlers – Sakshi Malik, Bajrang Punia and Vinesh Phogat – expressed their dissatisfaction. While Sakshi introduced her retirement, Bajrang and Vinesh returned the awards conferred by the Government.
Against mounting strain and the Ministry highlighting that the newly-elected physique appeared to be in full management of the previous office-bearers in full disregard to the Sports Code, Brij Bhushan introduced his ‘retirement’ from the wrestling administration.
The IOA’s expressed comparable issues whereas saying a brand new ad-hoc panel.
“The IOA has become aware that the recently appointed president and officials of the WFI have made arbitrary decisions in violation of their own constitutional provisions and against the principles of good governance espoused by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and without following due process overturned the rulings of the appointed ad-hoc committee.
“This not only highlights a governance gap within the federation but also signifies a noticeable departure from established norms,” stated an IOA order, stressing “adherence to governance norms as vital for ensuring fair play, transparency and accountability and to safeguard the interests of the sportspersons.”
