Abhinav Bindra publishes IOA’s letter and highlights unanswered questions about election rules

Olympic champion Abhinav Bindra has made public his correspondence with the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), reiterating his concern over the apparent inconsistency between the body’s constitution and the rules governing its Outstanding Sportsperson (SOM) elections. Bindra said he decided to share his October 31 letter in full after the private communication found its way into the public domain and was mentioned in recent media reports.

In a post attached to the letter, Bindra clarified that he had written to IOA President PT Usha and CEO Raghuram Iyer before the election to explain the apparent difference between Article 3.7 of the IOA constitution and the recently announced SOM election rules. He said he got an indication of what rules were being followed, but his central constitutional question remained unanswered. Bindra added that neither the Electoral Officer nor the IOA management had given any substantial explanation since then.

“It was never my intention to question individuals or influence the election outcome. It was and remains to promote greater clarity, transparency and trust in our institutions,” Bindra wrote in the caption.

“I have always believed that the strength of an institution does not lie in the absence of questions, but in its willingness to address them,” he added, stressing that the credibility of sports institutions depends on the fairness and integrity of their processes.

The former shooter said his decision to release the letter was intended to set the context of his earlier communications, rather than to prolong the dispute or question anyone’s intentions. He has already decided not to continue his candidacy in the election process, but insisted that the constitutional issue remains relevant even outside of his own participation.

WHAT IS A SOM RULE CHECK?

The IOA Athletes of Exceptional Merit Rules, ratified on September 8, 2026, established a framework under which an election official prepares an 80-member roster using a 10-step eligibility system. From this list, eight representatives are then elected to the IOA General Assembly, including four men and four women.

Bindra focuses on how this process complies with Article 3.7 of the IOA Constitution. Before the election, he sought an explanation for the apparent inconsistency, but said his specific question had not been resolved.

IOA ELECTIONS face increasing scrutiny

The issue resurfaced amid the controversy surrounding the November 9 SOM election. PT Usha finished fifth in the women’s event, lacks a seat in the General Assembly, while Anju Bobby George, Rani Rampal, Dola Banerjee and Saina Nehwal have secured four seats.

Former sprinter Ashwini Nachappa subsequently claimed that external pressure forced the candidates, including yourself, withdraw from the competition. Usha also raised complaints about alleged election campaign violations and asked the International Olympic Committee for an independent review of the election process.

The IOA Executive Board elections are scheduled for December 5. However, Bindra argues that his intervention is about institutional accountability and the need for constitutional clarity, rather than the outcome of any individual contest.

– The end