Cojuangco's second chance to resign

I have seen my share of irresponsible leadership in clubs, organizations and corporations in my time, but never did I imagine it in the arena of sports, where “sportsmanship” is supposed to be the rule.

Perhaps because of my occasional columns on the need for Philippine sports competitiveness, I have received lately many letters and briefs on the controversies happening now in national sports. And I must say that the tale of woe is acutely depressing. The complaints of national sports associations (NSAs) against the Philippine Olympic Committee (POC) leave beyond doubt that we face a serious problem in sports today.

Like others, I had thought that what was ailing Philippine sports was just poor coordination between government and the private and voluntary sectors, and that with a little more teamwork the problem could be fixed. Now, with all the laundry coming out, it would appear that leadership is the heart of the problem.

Bullying of NSAs

We could let pass one NSA crying foul against the POC leadership, but when nine or 10 of them are protesting clearly there is a problem. Separately at first but now more and more in chorus, these aggrieved NSAs contend that the POC leadership has been brazenly interfering in their internal affairs in total disregard of their rights under the Olympic charter and Philippine laws. Instead of uniting the NSAs for the good of sports, the POC leadership, they say, has been obsessed with preserving its hold on power and has been installing illegally its preferred leaders in various associations. On the pretext that an NSA cannot resolve an internal dispute, the POC board has invoked a dubious authority to intervene and inflicted its will on the NSAs.

From association to association – in archery, equestrian sport, billiards, bowling, cycling, dragon boat racing, badminton, swimming and wushu – there appears to be a pattern of disenfranchising members and displacing duly elected leaders with favored individuals.

In some NSAs – like the National Archery Association of the Philippines and the Wushu Federation of the Philippines – the POC leadership has simply refused to recognize their duly elected leaders, preferring instead to recognize those who have either resigned or been rejected.

In others – like the Philippine Badminton Association, the Integrated Cycling Federation of the Philippines, and the Billiards and Snooker Congress of the Philippines — the POC leadership has created rival factions to spearhead their own elections, in open challenge of the leaders and members who have been carrying the work of the associations for years.

In the cases of the Philippine Dragon Boat Association and the Philippine Bowling Congress, the tactics employed have swung from downgrading their status as voting members to mandating a revision of their charters. 

In the case of the Equestrian Association of the Philippines (EAP) and the Philippine Amateur Swimming Association, the POC leadership has stalled the holding of elections for years in order to keep favored incumbents in place.

The EAP case is striking because it involves Mr. Cojuangco himself as EAP president. He unilaterally cancelled an election set last March 31 at his own residence, and declared that the association would not hold elections until 2012. The reason apparently is to deflect the challenge of young equestrian members who have the numbers to take the EAP presidency from him.

All this is happening because this coming November, the POC General Assembly will decide anew whether to retain Mr. Cojuangco in the POC presidency. His opponents say he doesn’t have the numbers (elections were lost by his allies since November), hence the frantic effort to raid NSAs for fresh votes.

From legal to moral remedies

There are remedies that the aggrieved NSAs can avail of in order to put things to right. First, there should be a remedy in the courts. Second, because of the violations of the Olympic Charter, there should be a remedy through the International Olympic Committee (IOC). And third is the possible dismissal of the POC president come November.

But there is still one more remedy that I believe should be considered – and this is the moral one. When the Philippines failed miserably to medal in the 2008 Beijing Olympiad last August, I thought the only honorable thing for our top leaders in the POC and the Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) to do was to take full responsibility and resign their offices. Former PSC chairman William Ramirez has since left office. POC president Jose Cojuangco Jr. has not. 

Now, with all the controversies swirling around him, the POC president is being presented with a second chance to resign. For the sake of Philippine sports and for his own peace of mind, I think he should seize it. The prospect of the POC being dragged into court and, worse, into an international inquiry by the IOC will cost him and the nation dearly. And this could do harm to our relationships with international federations and the holding of major world sports events, such as the annual world pool championship, in the country.

In diplomacy, there is a rule that when an ambassador becomes ineffective, he should immediately resign his office. No ifs or buts about it. Effectiveness is the measure of service, and when one is no longer effective, one must ship out.

No matter how you look at it – with failure and controversy dogging him – the POC leadership has to be judged ineffective. He sits on top of a sports system that offers no hope of renewal. It is more involved in power politics than in sports excellence. It has allowed some officials to serve as president of several NSAs at the same time. Things have reached their nadir under Mr. Cojuangco’s leadership because sadly the tactics of politicians were brought into sports wholesale.

Many are wondering why this state of affairs has prevailed over our sports for so long. I believe this situation has persisted because of the misguided notion that the POC is sacrosanct and beyond public oversight. This is a distorted view of this very important sector of national life.

Best practice in other countries quickly shows this. In England and Australia, where sports development is very much advanced, the task belongs as much to government as it does to the voluntary and private sectors. Government is deeply involved in improving the organization and delivery of sports throughout the nation. Because it has more resources, government leads in investing in sport and physical activity. And investment is used to drive sports modernization and wider partnership between government and the voluntary and private sectors.

In sum, the POC cannot arrogate to itself the title of dictator of Philippine sports. Nothing in the Olympic charter, nothing in our laws, and nothing in the practice of nations allows this. The POC may insist on posturing as overlord; there is no reason why the nation should bow in obedience.

It’s not a question whether we can reform our sports system – we must. Letting things be means continued national failure and frustration.