Legal and Institutional Failures in Preventing Sexual Abuse of Athletes in India

Written By Kothapalli Aishwarya*

A. Introduction:

Sports-related sexual abuse exists worldwide as a destructive force that violates the core values of equality and protects athlete well-being. In India, where sports culture continues to grow, insufficient legal protection and built-in discrimination make sexual abuse a serious problem. The POSH Act of 2013 demands workplace safety, including sports facilities, yet fails to apply effectively because complaint processes lack training, and institutions create resistance and power imbalances.[1] The 2023 WFI president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh's wrestling protest demonstration alongside the 2022 Indian cycling coach controversy exemplifies the systemic problems of jailbreaking and unfavourable treatment toward victims in Indian sports. The Larry Nassar situation in America and past abuse within Australian swimming show that abuse is worldwide, but the American and Australian governments established policies that India can learn from. The emergence of esports brought additional problems to the field, which were made evident by Nina Jane Patel's incident, demonstrating existing legal shortcomings. [2] The current athletic problems, alongside the resulting decreasing female athlete participation rates, work to harm active athletes at present as well as athletes of the future. This academic research paper studies different law perspectives on cases from India and worldwide jurisdictions, along with system evaluation and proposed reform strategies to help readers develop actionable solutions for the issue.

B. Legal frameworks in India:

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, serves as India’s main legal instrument to handle sexual harassment incidents within sports. Section 2(o) of the Act extends the workplace to include sports institutes, stadiums, and competition venues for residential and non-residential activities for training and sports competitions as well. According to the law, the ICC, which every organisation with ten or more staff must have under the law, is to include at least 50% female members, with an external expert to be part of the committee structure to evaluate complaints. For smaller organisations or complaints against employers, Local Complaints Committees (LCCs) at the district level handle cases under Section 6. Under Sections 11 and 13 of the Act, the process of the inquiries demands that complaints within three months, investigations be conducted within 90 days and recommendations be implemented within 60 days. If any such organisation does not establish an ICC, the parent lender faces fines up to INR 50000 and multiple violations can result in license revocation under Section 26. The Act extends the legal field beyond the permissible limits in the Vishaka Guidelines (Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan- AIR 1997 SC 3011), where sexual harassment violations have been made against the constitutional rights of equality (Articles 14, 15) and dignity (Article 21). [3]

On the same note, although the POSH Act is clearly defined, the reality remains that it is not devoid of obstacles when applied in the sporting context. Concerning the scope of the Act, where they should put it into action, sports organisations and plenty of athletes do not have adequate knowledge of the applicable provisions of the Act. It is also common to find sports federations operating with non-functioning ICCs based on their functions or those having gone through proper necessary training, as discussed in Section 4, due to proprietary protection rather than justice. The leadership model practised at sports organisations is authoritative, and it creates fear among people to report harassment since people fear that the officials can ruin their sports careers or otherwise. This aspect of the physical workplace orientation of the Act does not cover the regulations of esports venues, meaning there is going to be a spell of legal uncertainty. The gendered language section of the Act only excludes male victims at present, hence necessitating an amendment to make it inclusive to all based on international gender-neutral legislation. Such loopholes indicate the necessity to have certain sports provisions which are more concrete and stronger in tackling the welfare of the athletes effectively. Moreover, non-adherence with the provisions of the POSH Act, like not having ICCs or weakness in making inquiries, not only conflicts with the statutory purpose but is also in conflict with the constitutionally guaranteed rights. Art 21 of the Indian Constitution upholds the right to life with dignity, and its developing jurisprudence has taken it to also imply a safe working environment free of harassment. Similarly, Article 14 and Article 15 caution against discrimination and the need to receive equal protection under the law. Emphasis has been placed by the Supreme Court in Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan and reiterated in Medha Kotwal Lele vs Union of India, that institutional measures of accountability are important in the upholding of those rights.

C. Indian cases & incidents which lead to systemic failures:

Many high-profile sexual abuse cases in India’s sports ecosystem have marred the ecosystem with numerous systemic failures to implement the POSH Act and secure justice. The 2023 wrestlers’ protest against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh (the former president of the Wrestling Federation of India) is one of the most famous cases. Olympic medallists Vinesh Phogat and Sakshi Malik, along with seven other female wrestlers, alleged sexual harassment and intimidation by Singh, which occurred between 2012 and 2022. Among the allegations were inappropriate touching, groping and demands for sexual favours, making the environment hostile. There was a lot to oppose, as, despite initial refusals by Delhi Police to file a First Information Report (FIR) without a Supreme Court petition, it came through. The POSH Act violated the WFI in being bereft of a functional ICC, and the Oversight Committee, headed by Mary Kom, was also criticised for a non-transparent investigation. The lack of interim measures, such as his suspension, allowed Singh to keep his influence. A powerful BJP MP, who denied the charges, was playing the institutional cover-ups and power imbalances. Public protests by wrestlers at Jantar Mantar showed that there were no safe reporting mechanisms, and they stigmatised the victims, who were shunned if they spoke up. [4]

In June 2022, another major instance occurred as a female cyclist alleged sexual harassment by national team coach RK Sharma during one of his training camps in Slovenia. However, Sharma argued that the complainant consensually had sex with him when both of them got drunk, and upon finding her in a career-ending situation, she accused the hotel and him of raping her. The other three cyclists who came riding in later also reported being victims of such abuse, and that trend was evident. Nevertheless, the investigation on the contract awarded to Sharma by the Sports Authority of India (SAI) came after the contract was terminated, with suspicions of the delay in responding manually greeted by the Cycling Federation of India (CFI). The process of inquiry got delayed, and there was no trained ICC in CFI, which led to a further aggravation of victim trauma and the ineffectiveness of the POSH Act in motivating sports federations. This event shows the importance of self-regulation in institutions, and it highlights the dire necessity of a legally binding mechanism other than internal committees to supervise the whole situation.

In July 2021, seven women athletes came forward to post allegations of sexual harassment by a well-known athletics coach at Chennai Academy, P Nagarajan. An athlete of 19 years of age who was a national-level runner was reported to have been abused by a physiotherapist based on curing her, and she too reported that she was threatened with murder in case she resisted it, as well as her family. Nagarajan has been detained and faced charges under the Indian Penal Code and Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, though the question brought about indicated that there should be a revision of the flaws that remained inherent in the system. The academy had no ICC, and the first complaints were brushed aside, and the athletes had to complain to the police. A culture of silence was also evident in the case since the athletes were individuals of low status whose careers would have been ruined and shunned by society. The inability of the victims to follow internal mechanisms and go to the police by themselves points out the failure of trust in the ability of the sports federations to provide redress.

In July 2010, an Indian ladies hockey player called coach Maharaj Kishan Kaushik was accused of sexual harassment who pestered him to have sexual favours and made obscene comments when they slept in a training camp. He resigned subsequently, and an inquiry panel set up by Hockey India and SAI cleared him, the course of which cast a shadow on the authenticity of internal investigations. The resignation of the accused and the serious charges against him did not stop an internal inquiry committee, which provided major applause to the accused. This not only removes the neutrality and independence of such mechanisms, but also, from this point, the entire process of POSH is questionable. POSH Act itself precedes the lack of interim measures like suspension of the accused party during the inquiry and marginality of the complainant in the Vishaka Guidelines, which resulted in the lack of protection of the victims.

The case is, in fact, a tragic case, because, recently in April 2022, Kerala-born basketball player Abhrajyoti Sah provoked the anger of coach Ravi Singh, who killed himself in Bihar, reporting his mental and sexual harassment. The coach was taped, which depicted the vast lack of an efficient mechanism for dealing with grievances that could have intervened earlier, and summarily. The horrifying incident speaks of the mental toll of unregulated bullying and the institutional failure of mental health or early complaint interventions in athletic establishments. In May 2015, the suicide of a 15-year-old athlete was attributed to harassment, and three others were hospitalised due to an apparent suicide pact, which suggests the psychological effects of the unregulated abuse.

The extent of the problem is laid out in data from Right to Information (RTI) requests. From 2010 to 2020, SAI registered 45 sexual harassment complaints against coaches, of whom five were sanctioned with a pay cut, two had their contracts terminated, one was suspended, and many cases are still pending. [5] Between 2017 and 2022, 28 cases were filed at government sports institutes, involving the same leniency in penalties. However, only four of the 56 recognised national sports federations had running ICCs, and the POSH Act had been violated, with a culture of impunity continuing. [6]

Systemic flaws become apparent when analysing such cases since they demonstrate violations of the POSH Act’s ICC requirements and untrained or biased committees alongside delayed investigations and victim discrimination. Authority power structures enable coaches and officials to take advantage of their positions, which causes athletes to minimise communities to avoid reporting abuse. The problem intensifies because institutions refuse to cooperate with external oversight initiatives and lack proper strategies to address situations where the accused should be moved temporarily. The broken processes that violate athlete rights to equality and dignity work against the POSH Act's founding vision, so reforms need to be implemented quickly. [7]

D. Exploring the Global framework and comparative analysis:

At global sports agencies, sexual abuses continue to occur with consistent dysfunctional patterns exemplifying similarities to the Indian sports agencies despite a few of their method of governance that are exhibits of potential solutions. The Larry Nassar scandal (2016-2018) in the United States unveiled some of the systematic abuse of USA Gymnastics. As a team physician, Nassar sexually assaulted more than 150 athletes (most of them were female students aged between 13-18 years old) with the help of medical procedures. Institutions decided to ignore complaints and forced athletes to remain quiet as the abusers continued their activities in power for decades. In 2017, major reforms grew out of this case that established the U.S. Centre of SafeSport, which conducts investigations of abuse and imposes sanctions and training requirements on offenders. Besides introducing the mandatory reporting practice, the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorisation Act of 2018 enhanced the safety of the victims. SafeSport has been able to explore thousands of cases despite financial and territorial constraints to serve India with a model of independent oversight structures. An important lesson of the American model is the juridical autonomy of the U.S. Centre of SafeSport, which has statutory powers to investigate the complaints of abuse and sanction offenders. Such externality guarantees neutrality, unlike the internal control in the independent ICCs that is prevalent in India today, wherein the power structure can be affected by hierarchical influences.

During the 1990s, in Australian swimming programs, coaches used their power over athletes to carry out misconduct that involved sexually harassing younger swimmers. The situation in India exactly matched the Indian cases, with minimal oversight, while abuse became normalised throughout society. Sports Integrity Australia started operations in 2020 to supervise complaints and investigations as well as implement abuse prevention measures. Through the National Integrity Framework, Australia requires organisations to create standards of conduct and explicit reporting obligations in combination with independent complaint management systems, which have resulted in more complaints and punitive measures. India differs from Australia because it maintains its exclusive use of internal ICCs, which sometimes show partiality under the POSH Act. [8]

A scandal involving historical football coach abuse emerged in 2016 in the United Kingdom due to insufficient child protection systems. The NSPCC launched the Child Protection in Sport Unit to develop safeguarding procedures and training which sports bodies had to implement through independent review requirements to establish their safeguarding officers. Safeguards that are implemented strengthen the integrity of youth athletes; however, there is still a need for better protection of adult guardians, and this should be considered by India in devising workplace harassment regulations.

In 2022, Nina Jane Patel endured this form of virtual harassment in the esports community. In Horizon Venues, the metaverse researcher Patel met avatar-based simulated attacks as well as verbal insults. However, as the remote noncontact dynamics and an ill-defined platform rule go, there was little potential for legal remedy, similar to weaknesses in India’s POSH Act on dealing with Virtual workplaces. From India’s perspective, on the back of background reports from around the world on gender abuse cases in esports, including Valorant, that collaboration is long overdue and requires platform rules in place between countries. [9]

The coverage of the POSH Act in India is quite wide, but it is general, as there are no specific sports by rule and no independent monitoring agencies. The global approach of compulsory reporting linked with independent oversight entities could help India reduce systemic bias. Despite their differences, India falls short compared to Australia and the United States regarding cultural transformation through training and public awareness development. India faces increased vulnerability to esports harassment due to its lack of digital work policy solutions for virtual harassment challenges that exist globally.

E. Systemic Failures and Their Impact:

Systemic failures in India’s sports ecosystem stem from multiple factors. First, many of the ICCs are failing to comply with the POSH Act’s required participation, and only a small number of federations do so with functional committees. Section 4 requires that ICCs be external to the accused, and untrained ICCs, often of the accused’s colleagues, are not impartial. Second, coaches, officials and athletes have third-order differences of power that form a culture of fear, especially for women from previously marginalised backgrounds who rely on winning to boost social capital. Third, offenders are neither deterred nor discouraged by delayed inquiries, which can take years, prolonged and free to the affected individuals, nor by lenient penalties like pay cuts or transfer, like SAI has treated 45 past complaints between 2010 and 2020. Fourth, victim stigmatisation and retaliation, such as career sabotage and public shaming, are deterrents from reporting, as in the case of the wrestlers’ protest. They are also unprotected in transient or digital environments, as there are no sports-specific policies to protect them or virtual workplace provisions.

These failures have profound impacts. Thus, they violate articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution, which protect the constitutional rights of equality and dignity of athletes to not be discriminated against and respect their right to equality, which is provided for in the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan. [10] Also, they run contrary to the purpose of the POSH Act by creating a culture of impunity that, amongst other things, leads to depression, suicide, and self-harm, like the basketball player in 2022. Justice is missing, and it discourages future generations, especially women, from engaging, hence diminishing participation and thus the gender disparities in sport. The stifling of India’s sporting potential economically reduces medal prospects and pride, confirms UNESCO, reporting that 21 per cent of female athletes were harassed and that 49 per cent of adolescent girls drop out of exercising, partly as a result. [11]

F. Reform Imperatives for India:

To battle sexual violence, the Indian sporting industry should develop a sports-led leadership model, which has its origin in the sports industry. The National Sports Integrity Commission, through the Safe Sport and Sport Integrity Australia model, would create a new body with the autonomy to receive complaints and deliver sanctions and education programmes. The incorporation of athletes along with legal practitioners and gender experts in ICCs will ensure equality in the course of carrying out operations in cases. This would reduce bias as a component of Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs). A change in the text of the POSH Act should enlist gender-neutral guidelines for sports that encompass transitory offices and power dynamics through all digital platforms by replacing the word women with the person in the third section of the Act. Each case of required reporting should be accompanied by legal penalties imposed in cases of coaches and officials not fulfilling the need for reporting. Interpol-like global organisations should support the framework as the foundation of an internationally harmonised code of conduct and not according to individual countries. Esports regulations should be aligned with the POSH Act code on the virtual platform, but in line with international regulations, as done in the case of Patel. Interactive prevention efforts of athletes and parents in conjunction with federations, as well as victim protective services of protection, such as counselling and confidential reporting, should be developed to progress cultural adjustment in addition to safety levels all over Indian sport.

Here are the Suggested amendments to the POSH Act in the case of Sports:

• Clarify the definition of the term workplace to the extent that it would encompass esports arenas, training camps and digital sporting facilities.

• To extend the scope of the international best practices as aligned with the Act, replace the gender language throughout the Act by using the term person regardless of gender, rather than the term woman.

• Impose a provision to mandate that ICCs are publicly registered and audited periodically by a proposed National Sports Integrity Commission.

• Develop sanctions that are enforceable on failure by institutions to report, investigate, or take any action on complaints of harassment.

• Such amendments would not only provide implications on process compliance but also ensure that the laws of India are by their commitments through the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

G. Conclusion:

In effect, it is a gross abuse of the rights of athletes whose health, both physical and psychological, is abused, and which propagates the establishment of a culture of fear and silence. Though the POSH Act is a broad legal provision, the absence of trained ICCs, institutional defiance, and power disparity render this Act ineffective outside the sports domain. These are the Wrestling Federation of India protests, which revive the inefficiency of the legal system to safeguard sportspeople. The response to the problem should entail that in India, the sport-specific provisions as well as the strengthening of reporting and support structure are positively included, and that India establishes a National Sports Integrity Commission in sport and amends it. Esports rules and virtual realm rules must also be combined in such a way as to ensure that the issues of harassment are resolved with similar additions. To eliminate these deep-seated issues, India should create a legally binding independent system (such as SafeSport) with constitutional protection. Special sports sections to the POSH Act, and online safeguards to esports, and virtual harassment, are a must. Yet there can be no legislative reform without cultural transformation, and this process must start with the athlete. The dignity, safety and justice should not be a vision, but it should be practical, integrated in the modus operandi of Indian sport at the grassroots level to the top. Adopting international best practices should be taken seriously, but it has to be culturally transplanted as well as athlete-centred. Nonetheless, its legal structure must support the safety and dignity of athletes, as athletes under this policy are the way to justice and give them space to flourish without fear of mistreatment and harassment, especially women athletes.

*The Author is a legal Scholar from Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat, India

(The Image used here is for representative purposes only)

References:

[1] Government of India. (2013). Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. Ministry of Women and Child Development.

[2] Patel, N. J. (2022). Nina Jane Patel esports harassment in the metaverse. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com 

[3] Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011

[4] Phogat, V., Malik, S., & Others. (2023). Wrestlers' protest against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. Times of India. https://www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com 

[5] Government of India. (2020). RTI Data on sexual harassment complaints in sports. 

[6] The Bridge. (2022). 28 sexual harassment cases in government sports institutes. The Bridge. https://thebridge.in 

[7] Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) and their failure in sports organizations under POSH Act.

[8] Sport Integrity Australia. (2022). National Integrity Framework. https://sportintegrity.gov.au 

[9] Patel, N. J. (2022). Nina Jane Patel esports harassment in the metaverse. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com 

[10] Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011

[11] UNESCO. (2024). Sports drop-out rate among girls. https://unesco.org IOC