The idea of creating a body to have oversight of integrity throughout South African sport is finally being discussed in the open.
It was presented by the SA Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) last Friday, and judging from the reaction of people in attendance, who admittedly represent a small percentage of the national sport population, they agreed it was necessary.
This is not the first time it’s been touted in this country. It’s been discussed at talkshop level at what is now Sport SA (formerly Sascoc), and has been potentially mooted within the National Sport and Recreation Bill that appears to have gone quiet in recent times.
Integrity units are increasingly common abroad, whether as national entities or sport-specific bodies set by but run independently of international federations.
This is long overdue in South African sport, where incompetence, corruption and bullying have been common features for far too long.
It’s clear that members of the many sporting structures in the country are unable or not willing to get rid of rotten leaderships.
And Sport SA president Barry Hendricks underlined a problem during his address to the AGM at the weekend when he said many national federations were found to be non-compliant.
“We’ve done our own assessment and we were shocked at the non-compliance of federations. But working with federations ... we’ve been able to increase the number of federations that are now properly compliant.”
He didn’t specify how the federations were lacking, but it is believed that in several cases their constitutions were badly outdated.
Strangely enough, it’s the same problem SAIDS has, because they need to update the legislation governing them. Failure to do so would ultimately see SA being barred from world sport, as Russia is as the moment.
The SAIDS thinking is to kill two birds with one stone by updating the legislation while creating a much-needed Sport Integrity SA body.
It’s one thing having a perfect constitution, but it’s something else to have perfect people driving a perfect organisation.
Because if the wrong people are in charge, having been put there by folk who don’t understand the requirements and nuances of good governance, the perfect constitution is meaningless.
Calling out rubbish administrators should be its (Sport Integrity SA) bread and butter.
Sport SA has a brand spanking new constitution, but it needs to be enforced properly.
For example Hendricks, in his address, spoke about a trip to Saudi Arabia where he was impressed by a function honouring all their sports stars. “Sascoc should have its own banquet ... give medals and honorary awards to the men and women who have done so well for SA sport.”
Hendricks is not committing some terrible transgression by suggesting this, but it would be a waste.
Someone from the Sport SA membership needs to remind him about the SA Sports Awards, which used to be run by Sascoc before being ceded to government. Either reclaim them or request some adaptations, but either way the country really does not need two separate awards ceremonies.
The point I’m illustrating is that the black-and-white of a constitution doesn’t necessarily safeguard against silly ideas.
The nation is in need of an integrity body.
Sport Integrity SA could be anything we want it to be — and I would really like it, among other things, to investigate and prosecute claims and offer a cheap avenue for disgruntled athletes and other role-players in sport to lodge grievances.
Calling out rubbish administrators should be its bread and butter.
Sport Integrity SA commissioners, if we call them that, should be a mix of sports-related experts, lawyers and academics, especially those specialising in ethics. No tribunal should be without those three skills.
But I get the nagging feeling that it would probably be best that the new body be Sport Integrity SA, and not SAIDS-plus-extra-integrity. Sport Integrity SA must be independent — of government, Sport SA (Sascoc) and even SAIDS.
If one looks at Sport Integrity Australia, you’ll find an organisation that focuses on various spheres of sport from anti-doping and match-fixing to betting and safeguarding.
The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority was folded into the body, but it wasn’t the driving force behind its creation.
Some will argue that the various commissions or tribunals will be independent and the people who sit on them will be also be independent of SAIDS and so on, which is fine in theory, but real life has a way of making matters murky.
And maybe I’m being overly pedantic suggesting SAIDS don’t sit atop the integrity totem pole. I have nothing against SAIDS, which apart from a couple of hiccups over the years, is by and large one of the most reliable sports bodies in this country — they really have been a pleasure to deal with.
But still, their focus is anti-doping, not all matters of integrity.
Let’s update the SAIDS Act, and draw up legislation for Sport Integrity SA separately, bearing in mind that SAIDS will be incorporated into the new structure.
SA sport needs to get integrity right the first time.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.