“The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind.”
– IOC Charter

The Reality of Sports Disputes in India

Amidst the blinding lights of the stadium and cheers of people, the legacies of various players are defined by milliseconds in the world of sports. Sports are not just about a game but a feeling that can seldom be expressed in words, and in this high-stakes world of sports, disputes are inevitable. Selection disagreements, contractual breakdowns, doping allegations, undue advantage, etc. – no competition is free of controversies. Despite such a rich sporting culture, India’s legal response to sports disputes remains sluggish, ambiguous, and scattered. The most viable option, litigation often comes with exhaustion, expensive lawyers, too many appeals, and unwanted media scrutiny.

Global Models vs Indian Lag in Sports Arbitration

Since its establishment in 1984, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has become a global standard for resolving sports disputes through arbitration. Comparatively, India’s journey in sports arbitration remains in its early innings. Absence of any specialised sports law, age-old policies which have not been amended, lack of awareness, and closed-door enquiries into disputes continue to plague the system. This article explores the status of sports arbitration in India and how it can be brought to the mainstream as the foremost dispute resolution process.

The Role and Benefits of Arbitration in Sports

The study of sports law, also known as lex sportiva, is on the upswing as it addresses problems that arise in sports performance, as well as the planning and execution of sporting activities. In simple words, sports arbitration provides a faster and flexible way to resolve disputes rather than going through tiring litigation proceedings. Recently, there have been observations about a growing trend of cooperation between the fields of law and sports, sparking greater interest in understanding the relationship between the two.

Arbitration offers a confidential, cost-effective, and time-bound alternative. Since athletes typically have brief careers, the lengthy and onerous legal procedure can be detrimental to a sports person’s career in terms of both time and mental harassment. Such dispute resolution mechanisms have the expertise, specialisation, and wider scope of knowledge about the sports field, leading to better, fairer, and more just outcomes as compared to if the matter were resolved through the judicial system.

The advantages of arbitration are also highlighted in Rajiv Dutta v. Union of India, where the Delhi High Court noted that although arbitration would have been a better way to resolve the dispute, the absence of an arbitration clause in the contract and the lack of a regulatory framework in the relevant sports federation prevented this route.

Challenges and Institutional Shortcomings in India

There isn’t any special law to regulate sports disputes in India, which leaves the jurisdiction and procedure in doubt. Such disputes are handled by committees that have the same members who are part of the federation, making the process prejudiced. The National Sports Development Code of 2011 and the 2016 Grievance Redressal Guidelines do try to provide some guidance, but their compliance remains weak.

Earlier attempts, such as the Indian Court of Arbitration for Sports (ICAS), established in 2011 under the Indian Olympic Association, have failed due to poor implementation and lack of awareness. ICAS never emerged as the first choice for dispute resolution because of its vague and unclear functionality. Similarly, although the Sports Arbitration Centre of India (SACI) was established in 2021, arbitration remains underutilised in India due to the lack of regulatory clarity, inconsistent adoption of arbitration clauses, and the autonomous nature of sports federations like the BCCI.

India’s acceptance of arbitral awards by CAS and other international sports dispute resolution bodies has been one of underlying resistance and hesitation. The case of IAAF v. Athletics Federation of India & Ors. showed CAS’s influence in the Indian legal landscape, yet it failed to bring about any major change. The Supreme Court judgement in the case of Venture Global has made foreign enforcement of arbitral awards difficult by requiring increased judicial examination. The court held that Indian courts could set aside the foreign awards and implement their jurisdiction. This poses more hardships for foreign judgements being applied in India, adding to the already existing problems of accessibility of CAS by Indian sportsmen.

However, there has been a gradual shift in the Supreme Court’s take on arbitration. In cases like Yograj Infrastructure Ltd v. SsangYong Engineering and Construction Co Ltd, the court expressed its intention to limit unjustified judicial interference in foreign awards. Latest judgements show a trend of the Indian Courts to support legitimate foreign arbitration agreements and refrain from interfering. Nevertheless, this shift in attitude is still in its early stages, and it remains to be seen how it will affect sports arbitration in India.

The Way Forward: Building a Robust Arbitration Framework

This underscores that incorporation of a specialised legal framework for sports, backed by enforceable legislation and independent tribunals, is no longer optional but essential. Action must be taken to address these disputes so that athletes, sports federations, and other auxiliary organisations involved in Indian sports can focus on their respective game-related goals rather than pondering how to settle scores with or against one another.

To truly make arbitration a viable solution for sports disputes in India, several foundational steps must be taken. Such as, firstly, if a specialised Sports Act is not a viable option, then a separate provision on sports arbitration should be added in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996. A sense of legitimacy by Parliament and a standard procedure would lead to trust and timely justice delivery.

Secondly, an autonomous sports arbitration tribunal with clear procedural rules must be set up, which would have jurisdiction over all national and private sports bodies. Virtual hearings should be incorporated to ensure efficiency and accessibility. Retired professionals from various sports should be recruited, whose role would be restricted to providing opinions on the technicalities of the sports.

Thirdly, to compensate for the lack of skilled lawyers and arbitrators, capacity-building through specialised training, knowledge exchange programmes with institutions like the CAS, and regular legal education workshops should be encouraged by the government, the Supreme Court, bar associations, law firms, and law schools.

Finally, the success of arbitration in sports will depend heavily on political will and the government’s commitment. The state must not only support such steps but also continuously oversee that the concerned stakeholders are aware of these alternative remedies. Only then can India build a system that supports its athletes, upholds their rights, and allows them to focus on achieving excellence without worrying about unresolved disputes back home.

“The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.” – Lao Huang
It is the need of the hour that India embraces arbitration as a way forward for sports dispute resolution. This would lead to a more equitable, professional, just, and globally respected sporting culture.