Courting suspension

The confusion created by a “snap” election and subsequent induction of the “new” officers by Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) chairman Harry Angping has placed the troubled Equestrian Association of the Philippines (EAP) in danger of receiving a serious reprimand and possible suspension from the Lausanne-based global governing body Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI).

The problem smacks of the way things are turning sour in the management of Philippine sports with leadership squabbles compromising the ability of athletes to perform on the playing field. Athletes are caught in the middle of quarrels to build empires, often being made to choose sides and leaving the fate of their careers in the hands of power brokers. In the end, only the country suffers as the global community laughs off the petty bickering over turf which really isn’t much to fight for from an international perspective.

The basketball experience is a perfect example of how squabbling can lead to dire consequences. The Philippines has been suspended thrice by FIBA, once because of a government order refusing Yugoslavia and other “communist” countries entry into Manila to participate in the World Championships in 1993 and twice because of leadership disputes in 2001 and 2005-07. The third suspension prevented the Philippines from competing in basketball at the 2005 Southeast Asian Games in Manila and it was later decided to scuttle the event, a black mark in the history of the country’s favorite sport. The third suspension also disallowed the Philippines to participate in basketball at the 2006 Asian Games in Doha.

Another example of how leadership squabbling can affect athletes was when the country’s entire cycling team, except for one, was disenfranchised during the Southeast Asian Games in Laos last year. The global governing body Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) refused to license the Philippine riders affiliated with a group recognized by the Philippine Olympic Committee (POC). The problem stemmed from a leadership dispute in the Integrated Cycling Federation of the Philippines where the UCI and POC recognized two different presidents.

Slowly, the POC has been resolving the pending leadership issues, mending fences, making peace offerings and appealing for sobriety to preserve national pride.

But the latest incident involving equestrian is probably the most critical challenge of all because POC president Jose Cojuangco’s leadership in the EAP is under question. Although Cojuangco qualified to run for the POC presidency because of his position as EAP president, he may continue as POC president until the end of his term in 2012 even if removed from the EAP helm. Whether it is morally right for Cojuangco to remain as POC president without the EAP mandate is another question.

* * * *

Buhay party list Rep. Carissa Coscolluela has waged a relentless campaign to wrest the EAP presidency from Cojuangco and it makes you wonder why she is so driven. Surely, as a Congresswoman, there are many ways for Coscolluela to support equestrian without trying to boot out Cojuangco. Is there no longer any respect for authority? Cojuangco is probably on his last term of office. Is Coscolluela that much in a hurry to move in at the risk of triggering divisiveness among the riders themselves? What is the cost of her attempt to grab power and what is the benefit?

It pains sports fans to see Toni Leviste on one side of the spectrum and Mikee Cojuangco-Jaworski on the other. Shouldn’t the two equestrian icons be on the same side?

The manner by which Coscolluela “won” the EAP presidency is highly dubious. She got a favorable court order to call an election despite contrary rules set by the EAP Constitution and By-Laws and presided in a voting in Makati last March 31. Disregarding the rules of election, she called for a poll and “won” as president when 22 of 27 members in attendance voted for her. Cojuangco said the election was started 12 minutes before the scheduled time of the meeting and finished in less than 15 minutes. When he arrived at the meeting place, the election was over. By the way, the rules stipulate that the president is elected by the seven-man Board of Trustees, not by members at large. Four of the seven in the Board objected to Coscolluela’s election.

* * * *

In April last year, Coscolluela also “won” as EAP president but Cojuangco questioned the legitimacy of the poll. He appealed the result before the FEI Executive Board in Lausanne and Coscolluela’s election was eventually nullified. A new election was set, this time with FEI second vice president Christopher John Hodson of New Zealand flying in to observe the proceedings in Manila last November. Alas, the voting didn’t push through when Coscolluela got a temporary restraining order from the Regional Trial Court Makati branch 66. Cojuangco claimed he would’ve won the election.

The same Regional Trial Court ruled for another election and Coscolluela said she only complied with the order in calling for the poll last March 31. Cojuangco, however, said the election was unconstitutional and therefore, the results not binding.

To jump the gun on Cojuangco, Coscolluela hastily requested Angping to induct her and the other “newly elected” EAP officers. That, too, was highly irregular because it is POC, not PSC, recognition that is vital for accreditation with the FEI. Coscolluela’s induction was staged as a media event to legitimize her ascension into power – for publicity and public opinion purposes.

Coscolluela has tried to appease Cojuangco by offering him the EAP chairmanship, a position that doesn’t exist in the Constitution and By-Laws. But that appears to be par for the course as far as Coscolluela is concerned. Has she no regard for what is lawful? She apparently seems comfortable making her own laws and rules if they suit her.

Cojuangco, of course, has refused Coscolluela’s kind offer and is holding on to his claim to the EAP presidency. How the FEI will react to this clash is anybody’s guess but if the basketball problem is a precedent, a suspension on the EAP appears imminent unless Cojuangco and Coscolluela resolve the leadership crisis. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the various International Sports Federations, such as the FEI, vehemently protest government intervention in sports and are strongly against resorting to the civil courts in settling sports-related disputes. If a dispute in sports is brought to the attention of the IOC and mediation is required, it is sent to the Lausanne headquarters of the Court of Arbitration for Sport which was established in 1984 for this purpose.

What a shame. To drag the POC president himself into this mess surely leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The Philippines has once again succeeded in becoming a laughing stock in sports.