India’s Sports Governance Gets Legal Teeth: The National Sports Governance Bill, 2025

To streamline governance, promote fair play, and elevate India’s sporting ambitions, the National Sports Governance Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on July 23, 2025. This landmark legislative initiative seeks to address long-standing issues in Indian sports governance, such as opaque functioning, power struggles, lack of accountability, and financial mismanagement within national sports federations.

Key Highlights of the Bill:

• National Sports Bodies: The Bill provides for the establishment of one National Olympic Committee, one National Paralympic Committee, a National Sports Federation for each designated sport, and a Regional Sports Federation for each designated sport. These bodies must hold international recognition and affiliation. They are to be structured with a general body, executive committee, ethics committee, dispute resolution committee, athletes committee, president, secretary general, and treasurer. The Bill defines the terms, eligibility, and disqualification criteria for these positions.
• National Sports Board: A National Sports Board, headquartered in Delhi, will be constituted as a corporate body with perpetual succession. It will comprise a Chairperson and other prescribed members. The Board will be empowered to grant recognition, maintain records, conduct inquiries, constitute ad hoc bodies, issue guidelines, frame safe sports policies, maintain a roster of election officers, collaborate with international bodies, ensure compliance, and protect the rights and welfare of athletes and associated personnel.
• Code of Ethics: Every National Sports Body must formulate a Code of Ethics for its stakeholders, setting minimum standards for ethical and appropriate conduct. The code will also include safeguards for vulnerable individuals against abuse.
• Safe Sports Policy: A comprehensive Safe Sports Policy will be implemented to protect women, minor athletes, and other vulnerable individuals. It mandates an internal grievance redressal mechanism within each National Sports Body.
• Recognised Sports Organisations: Only recognised organisations will be eligible for government funding. They must comply with international charters and statutes and will be treated as public authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act).
• National Sports Election Panel: A National Sports Election Panel will be notified, comprising experienced election officials, to oversee the conduct of free and fair elections to Executive Committees and Athletes Committees of National Sports Bodies.
• National Sports Tribunal: A dedicated Tribunal will be constituted to adjudicate sports-related disputes independently, speedily, and cost-effectively. However, it will not have jurisdiction over disputes arising during major international events, matters under exclusive jurisdiction of internal bodies, international federations, or doping-related disputes. Pending cases will be transferred to the Tribunal and continue from the stage at which they were pending.
• Public Servants: Members, officers, and employees of the Board and Tribunal will be deemed public servants under section 2(28) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
• Use of National Names: Sports organisations must obtain a no-objection certificate from the Central Government—and in some cases, the Board—for use of national names, insignia, or symbols.
• National Sports Board Fund: A National Sports Board Fund will be constituted, comprising grants, fees, and other sums approved by the government. The Fund will cover salaries, allowances, and administrative expenses.
• Accounts and Audit: Proper accounts must be maintained in the prescribed form and will be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India at regular intervals.

Until now, the sports sector has been governed by frameworks lacking legal enforceability, most notably, the National Sports Development Code, 2011, which often required judicial intervention, hampering efficient administration. In 2011, the Sports Ministry released a draft National Sports Development Bill, aiming to introduce governance reforms. A working group under Justice (Retd.) Mukul Mudgal was further appointed to produce a revised draft, but due to strong opposition, particularly over age and tenure limits, it was shelved in 2013. The Delhi High Court, in 2014, upheld the 2011 Code, further stalling reform.

The current Bill marks a significant shift by introducing statutory enforceability. Governance oversight will shift from the Ministry to independent statutory bodies i.e., the Board, Tribunal, and Election Panel, enhancing transparency and autonomy. The Bill introduces a structured dispute resolution mechanism, reducing the need for court interventions or ad hoc arrangements.

Importantly, the Bill mandates accountability and ethical compliance through a Unified Code of Ethics, a Safe Sports Policy, and RTI applicability, which were previously voluntary. While the Bill initially brought all sports bodies under the RTI Act, it was swiftly amended to limit this provision only to entities receiving government funds, thus excluding the BCCI, which has consistently resisted RTI coverage.

By institutionalising governance norms and representation requirements, the Bill aims to improve ethical standards and transparency. Legal provisions for athlete protection and gender inclusion further strengthen the governance framework. The Bill also aligns with international charters and reflects India’s commitment to best practices and its ambition to bid for the 2036 Olympics.

However, concerns remain. Critics argue that by granting sweeping powers to a body fully appointed by the Central Government, the Bill may compromise the autonomy of national federations. Opposition leaders have called for the Bill to be referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee. Others have pointed out the Bill’s silence on State Olympic Associations and State Sports Federations, as well as implementation and resource constraints. Analysts caution that the Bill’s success will ultimately depend on the independence, efficiency, and resourcing of the institutions it seeks to establish.