New Delhi: The Indian Olympic Association’s (IOA) executive council on Thursday refused to ratify the appointment of CEO Raghuram Iyer, leading to a standoff with President P.T. Usha at the IOA headquarters.
Usha expressed concerns that the decision could hamper India’s “dialogue with the IOC’s Future Host Commission” regarding the country’s bid to host the 2036 Olympics.
“Without a CEO, the IOC will not permit any discussions with the Future Host Commission (FHC) for the 2036 Olympics because the CEO is required to lead these talks. We need to demonstrate professionalism. The IOC only called us for a meeting when we appointed the CEO in January, allowing us to engage in dialogue with the FHC twice. They are now asking when we can resume talks, but I am unable to proceed,” said Usha.
During the crucial executive council meeting, which was attended by IOC Director Jerome Poivey as a special invitee, 12 members expressed the necessity of having a CEO but raised concerns about Iyer’s appointment. The matter was put to a vote, with 12 members opposing the ratification of the CEO, according to the minutes of the meeting signed by all EC members except Usha, who chaired the session.
Iyer, who was appointed CEO in January, faced objections over his ₹20 lakh per month pay package. The EC members suggested restarting the appointment process with new terms of reference, aiming to complete it within two months.
Following the vote, Usha left the meeting, and the members decided that Joint Secretary Kalyan Chaubey would continue as acting CEO until a new CEO is appointed in accordance with the constitution.
The meeting minutes noted that Usha left “abruptly and did not return.” Usha, however, stated, “I was in the meeting for about an hour, and once the agenda was covered, I left. They cannot decide and include this in the minutes without me.”
Asked about her next steps, Usha said, “I will decide on the best course of action as per the constitution. Initially, they had concerns about the CEO’s salary, and now they want to restart the appointment process? They keep changing their stance. It took us a long time to appoint the CEO.”
Usha added that during the January EC meeting, which was the only one video-recorded, she asked each member about Iyer, and they only wanted his salary renegotiated, though no specific rates were suggested. She also claimed that members usually don’t allow meetings to be recorded.
Jerome Poivey advised the members to proceed with ratification, but the minutes stated, “The IOC representative acknowledged this as an internal matter of the IOA, with no specific interference from the IOC.”
An EC member argued, “We never approved the CEO’s appointment or reviewed the applicants for the position. What interest does the CEO have in continuing without board ratification?”
“We aim to appoint a new CEO within two months. Our priority is to improve Indian sports and streamline operations,” the member added.
India is interested in bidding for the 2030 Youth Olympics and 2036 Summer Olympics, but internal conflict within the IOA is delaying discussions with the FHC.
As a preliminary step towards bidding, the FHC engages in discussions with countries expressing interest in hosting the Olympics, followed by multiple rounds to finalize bids and candidates before making recommendations to the IOC Executive Board. The IOC has emphasized that a “strong National Olympic Committee is essential for a successful bidding process.”
