Discuss how athlete representation mechanisms such as 'Sportspersons of Outstanding Merit' can improve the legitimacy and accountability of sports bodies.

The National Sports Governance Act, 2025 requires at least two outstanding sportspersons on every national federation's executive committee of up to 15 members [1]. The Delhi High Court is supervising reform of the All India Tennis Association (AITA), and there a 40-member Sportspersons of Outstanding Merit (SOM) roster must be finalised before elections [2]. Mechanisms like these move athletes from being governed by sports bodies to helping govern them.

Enhancing legitimacy

• Stakeholder voice: SOM members get votes and can stand for office, so federation decisions carry athletes' consent [2].
• Competent leadership: the President, Secretary General and Treasurer must be sportspersons of outstanding merit or have served two full terms on the executive committee [1].
• Inclusiveness: at least four women must sit on the executive committee [1].
• Athlete-led reform: the petition led by former player Somdev Devvarman started court-supervised changes to AITA's constitution [2].

Strengthening accountability

• Internal check: athlete members can question how funds are used. This adds to the National Sports Board's power to inquire into misuse of funds and suspend recognition [1].
• Ethics and grievances: federations must adopt a code of ethics and a grievance mechanism for athletes [1].
• Limit on entrenchment: no one may serve more than three consecutive terms [1]. Elections are overseen by a national panel of electoral officers [1].

Limitations

• Tokenism: two seats out of 15 give athletes limited weight [1].
• Roster capture: whoever draws up the SOM list shapes the electorate. AITA's elections were pushed from September 30 to November 27 to finish the roster [2].
• Loophole: the two-term route lets administrators with no sporting record become officers [1].
• Enforcement gap: the National Sports Tribunal cannot hear internal disputes of federations, so athletes still have to file Article 226 writ petitions [1]. Representation also could not stop the large-scale financial misconduct the administrator alleged [2].

Way forward

• Publish objective, transparent criteria for SOM rosters, and create independent athletes' commissions elected by players.
• Bring internal disputes under the Tribunal, and use the Board and Tribunal Rules notified in 2026 to act early [3].

Athlete representation gives sports bodies a mandate from the people they serve and an internal check on their conduct. It works only when backed by transparent rosters, a specialist forum for disputes and an active regulator. Combined in this way, mechanisms like SOM can turn federations into accountable public institutions, in line with the Act's goal of good governance in sport.