[AIFF polls] Players with international experience can vote; cannot exclude those who can "actually dribble": Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered that the polls for an interim body to head the All India Football Federation (AIFF) be conducted expeditiously in line with the draft constitution in place [All India Football Federation vs Rahul Mehra and ors]. .A Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and JB Pardiwala rejected the appellant's prayer to disallow individual eminent players from voting, and made it clear that players with international experience will be allowed to vote and be part of the executive and general committees."You don't want eminent players to vote in the executive body? It will become a fiefdom for politicians then, excluding those who can actually dribble," Justice Chandrachud remarked. The Bench accordingly ruled, "We order and direct that:(i) The elections to the Executive Committee of AIFF should he held expeditiously and shall be concluded in terms of the time schedule which has been indicated in the tabulated statement set out above; (ii) The elections shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the provisions of Article 26 of the draft Constitution. The persons chosen as representatives shall have to conform to Article 26. (iii) This would be an interim arrangement without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties; (iv) The interim Body would continue for a period of three months subject to further orders of this Court till the Constitution is finalized; (v) The interim Body shall not claim any equities on the basis of this order and the present arrangement would be subject to further orders; (vi) The CoA shall be apprised of the decisions of the elected Body; and (vii) Each of the associations representing the State/UTs would nominate one representative to the electoral college. The 36 member electoral college of eminent football players shall consists of 24 male and 12 female players. Each of them would be subject to the requirement of having represented India in at least one international match and should have retired from international football at least 2 years prior to the date of the notification of the elections."The matter will be heard next on September 20. .The top court was hearing a plea filed by the AIFF challenging the Delhi High Court order staying fresh election of the committee. The petitioners had contended that the current committee of administrators was running illegally.At today's hearing, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appearing for the Committee of Administrators, began by explaining why the draft constitution had provisions of tenure limits and mandatory cooling-off periods. He submitted that the same set of people had been occupying State and National football associations."We see for 15-28 years, the same people being in power; son and father taking turns to head. The idea is to not allow entrenchment to take place," he said. Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain, appearing for the Union Sports Ministry, suggested that the first newly-elected body's tenure should be limited to 1 term. "The poll is taking place without constitution being finalised ... [but] We need a committee immediately," Jain said. To the State associations arguing that the draft constitution is inconsistent with the Central government's National Sports Code, Jain said that the latter is an enabling and not a restrictive document. As the hearing progressed, the Bench emphasised that eventually elections have to be conducted given the impending FIFA Under-17 Women's World Cup. It also accepted Jain's contention as to the sports code. "The National Sports Code cannot be read in the manner of a statute. A holistic understanding of its provisions has to be arrived at in order to effectuate both its intent and purpose. In this backdrop, consistent with the need for the healthy development of the sport of football in India, the inclusion of eminent players who have represented the country would be of immense benefit. The administration of the affairs of football will benefit from the experience, knowledge and concerns of the players themselves. They are vital stakeholders", the judges stated.Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for 35 State football associations and other football clubs, argued that the draft constitution is against the National Sports Code as individual players cannot vote as an electoral college but can only participate in management."We want to comply with the National Sports Code and are doing our best ... That is FIFA's norms, eminent players cannot vote individually. It's a team sport ... Football is a poor, poor cousin of cricket in this country and depends on FIFA. We cannot defy them ... Players are running some associations," she said."Long and short is you don't want individual voices of football players to vote," Justice Chandrachud remarked. .Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan appeared for the Football Sports Development Limited, and advocate Rahul Mehra appeared on caveat being the petitioner-in-person before the Delhi High Court. [Follow our coverage of today's hearing].[Read order]