RETHINKING SPORTS GOVERNANCE IN INDIA: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025

The National Sports Governance Act, 2025 (NSGA) marks India's transition from largely voluntary sports governance norms, exemplified by the non-binding National Sports Development Code 2011, to a comprehensive statutory framework enacted amid longstanding concerns over corruption, federation non-compliance, and athlete welfare. This article critically evaluates the NSGA within a global reform environment characterized by commercialization-driven conflicts of interest, opacity, elite power concentration, safeguarding failures, and limited application of human rights and social protection frameworks to sport. The study critically analyses Indian sports law, governance reform, athlete rights, sports arbitration and Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) jurisdiction, constitutional and federal constraints, comparative models (UK, Australia, Canada), and integrity regimes including anti-doping and match-fixing. The NSGA's architecture establishing a National Sports Board to regulate recognition and compliance, a National Sports Tribunal for specialized adjudication, and a National Sports Election Panel for democratic processes signals an ambition to enhance transparency, accountability, and integrity. However, the analysis identifies substantial design and implementation risks: centralization may undermine federation autonomy and trigger international sanctions under Olympic Charter Rule 27; athlete welfare objectives are weakened by the absence of a codified Athlete Bill of Rights; tribunal independence may be compromised by executive influence; the Act may face constitutional vulnerabilities relating to legislative competence in a federal structure and freedom of association; and ambiguity over NST–CAS pathways creates jurisdictional uncertainty. Comparative evidence indicates that durable reform requires funding-linked governance standards, meaningful athlete representation, independent dispute resolution, and comprehensive integrity and safeguarding frameworks. The NSGA's transformative potential therefore depends on targeted amendments, clarified arbitration routes, stronger institutional independence, and sustained enforcement and culture change aligned with international good-governance and human-rights standards.