IOA's decision to take charge of WFI is first step in our fight for justice: wrestlers
The Hindu
The IOA, through its letter on May 12, asked the secretary general of WFI to hand over the official documents including financial instruments to its ad-hoc panel, making it clear the outgoing office bearers shall have no role
The protesting wrestlers on May 14 termed the Indian Olympic Association's (IOA) decision to take charge of all the activities of the Wrestling Federation of India as the "first step" in their fight against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, the former WFI chief.
The country's top wrestlers, have been protesting at the Jantar Mantar for the last 22 days demanding the arrest of Brij Bhushan for his alleged sexual harassment of women wrestlers.
Also read: Wrestlers vs WFI sexual harassment row | From Jantar Mantar to the Supreme Court, the story so far
The IOA, through its letter on May 12, asked the secretary general of WFI to hand over the official documents including financial instruments to its ad-hoc panel, making it clear the outgoing office bearers shall have no role in the running of the federation.
The WFI said it has no issues in obeying the IOA order since they were already co-operating with the authorities.
"This (the dissolution of the current WFI) is the first step in our fight for justice. Our fight has begun in right earnest, it's a victory for us... and we will continue or fight until we get justice," said a protesting wrestler.
Another wrestler rued that not a single ruling party's parliamentarian had met the wrestlers "to extend support in our fight for the dignity of women".
Sumit Nagal attained the 77th place in ATP rankings. As per the established criteria, the top 56 players, both in men’s and women’s rankings, will attain automatic qualification for the Olympics but no more than four per country can make the cut for the Games, a rule which allows lower ranked players to sneak into the draw.
Justice G. Jayachandran of the Madras High Court has said that Justice G.R. Swaminathan has exhibited bias against the State police by “showing interest in passing orders hastily without consulting the Bench partner (Justice P.B. Balaji)“ in a habeas corpus petition filed against the preventive detention of YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar under the Goondas Act.