Senior figures across Formula 1 are declining to publicly criticise FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem, despite mounting controversy over his leadership and a recent proposal to remove term limits for the role. Sources within the paddock suggest the silence stems from fear of institutional reprisals, creating a climate in which dissent is effectively stifled even as unrest over the Emirati's conduct continues to grow.
Ben Sulayem has held the FIA presidency since late 2021, a period marked by high-profile departures from the governing body, contentious regulatory changes, and public disputes with Formula 1's commercial leadership. Last week, reports emerged that the president intends to amend FIA statutes to eliminate the cap on presidential terms, a move that would allow him to extend his tenure indefinitely. While fans and media outlets reacted sharply, the paddock itself remained conspicuously quiet.
According to BBC F1 correspondent Andrew Benson, that reticence is calculated. "People in the Formula 1 world are very reluctant to speak out publicly on this issue because they fear reprisals," Benson wrote in a recent Q&A for the broadcaster. The concern is not theoretical. The FIA wields considerable regulatory power over teams, drivers, and personnel, and any perceived dissent can carry professional consequences.
Legal challenge and electoral concerns
Ben Sulayem's presidency is currently the subject of a legal inquiry in France, initiated by driver and former presidential candidate Laura Villars. Villars has challenged both the election process that brought Ben Sulayem to power and the subsequent rule changes that consolidated his position. Yet even this development has attracted minimal public comment from within the sport. The outcome of the French court case remains pending.
Ahead of last year's FIA presidential election, the governing body altered its regulations in ways that effectively narrowed the field of challengers. Carlos Sainz Sr. withdrew his candidacy before the vote, while former ACCUS president Tim Mayer was unable to mount a credible campaign. Villars opted for legal recourse rather than continuing through internal channels. The pattern suggests an electoral environment in which opposition is structurally disadvantaged.
A climate of unrest without outlet
Benson noted that disquiet over Ben Sulayem's leadership style has been present since the start of his first term, with little improvement in the intervening years. High-ranking officials, including sporting director Steve Nielsen and secretary general for sport Peter Bayer, have departed the organisation during his tenure. Public friction with Formula 1 CEO Stefano Domenicali over governance boundaries has also surfaced repeatedly, yet team principals and drivers have largely refrained from weighing in.
The reluctance to challenge the FIA presidency is not without precedent. Benson pointed to Jean-Marie Balestre, the French former president whose autocratic style was immortalised in the Ayrton Senna documentary, where he is seen declaring that the best decision is his decision. Balestre's tenure, which ran from 1978 to 1991, was similarly marked by centralised control and minimal internal opposition.
What it means for governance
The current situation raises broader questions about the FIA's institutional accountability. If senior figures within Formula 1 feel unable to speak openly about the governing body's direction, the sport's checks and balances are effectively inoperative. The proposed removal of term limits would further entrench that dynamic, creating conditions in which leadership can operate without the constraint of electoral cycles or succession planning.
For now, the paddock waits. Villars' legal challenge may yet force a reckoning, but absent a structural shift in how the FIA responds to internal dissent, the silence is likely to continue. What remains clear is that the governing body's president enjoys a degree of insulation from criticism that would be difficult to sustain in most other major sporting organisations
0

Replies (0)
Login to reply