Why the process of challenging for motorsport's top job is far from straightforward

Running world motorsport’s governing body is often a thankless task. Formula 1 alone has been a febrile web of commercial challenges, political dissent and clandestine manoeuvrings for decades now.

And yet, despite the criticism faced by every recent president going back to the days of Jean-Marie Balestre, rarely has an incumbent candidate been opposed. All of them have stepped aside at the end of their terms. Balestre himself was manoeuvred aside into a different role rather than defeated in a vote by Max Mosley, who then enjoyed four terms – unopposed each time.

That may be about to change now Carlos Sainz, twice a world rally champion, has announced his intention to run against Mohammed Ben Sulayem in the next presidential election this December. It’s understood that at least one other potential candidate is considering their options too.

But this is not a popularity contest, and there is a reason why so many sitting presidents have gone unchallenged. The FIA’s election rules are positively Byzantine in their complexity, setting out many mathematical obstacles that are difficult for challenger candidates to navigate.

It’s also fair to say that many previous presidents have quietly pulled up the ladder to block opposition.

F1 drivers have gripes about stewarding inconsistencies and the crackdown on swearing

Photo by: Getty Images

It’s complicated

It’s important to recognise – and for many of those trapped in the F1 ‘bubble’ this will be a difficult cognitive Rubicon to cross – that F1 is far from the be-all and end-all of the FIA’s business.

Its primary remit as an association of national automobile clubs is to advocate for motoring matters and road safety. For decades, setting and enforcing the rules for motorsport was the responsibility of a separate body within the wider organisation until Mosley consolidated operations (and elections) in his first term.

To even run for president, a potential candidate must demonstrate a provable global support base. It is not a matter of filling in an application form and lodging a deposit. Rightly so from a rational perspective, although the maths required militates against potential challengers.

Historically the voting patterns have much in common with the annual Eurovision Song Contest in that friends and neighbours align on preferred candidates

Besides themselves, the presidential candidate requires a full team (or ‘list’) of FIA members on their ticket, supporting them exclusively: a putative president of the senate, a deputy president and seven vice-presidents for sport, and a deputy president for automobile, mobility and tourism. Of the vice-presidents, there must be two from Europe and one each from Africa, Asia-Pacific, North America, South America, and the Middle-East and North Africa regions.

While this ensures any potential presidential candidate must demonstrate global support, the fact that the FIA statutes demand members must declare themselves for just one candidate (they cannot appear on more than one ‘list’) adds to the challenge of assembling a bid.

An incumbent president could block challengers by gaining the total support of just one region – when David Ward called off his challenge to Jean Todt in 2013, he did so because 11 of the 12 North American auto clubs had pledged support to Todt several months earlier.

Sainz Sr’s son being an active Formula 1 driver could be perceived as a conflict of interest

Photo by: Giuseppe Cacace / AFP / Getty Images

From there, the numbers game continues into the election itself. The FIA has 245 member organisations drawn from 149 countries. Each country gets 24 votes although these are split between the mobility clubs and sporting clubs – and some countries have more than one mobility club, whereas others have a single club covering both sport and mobility. Therefore some carry more weight than others.

Historically the voting patterns have much in common with the annual Eurovision Song Contest in that friends and neighbours align on preferred candidates. So it is a tricky landscape to navigate – one likely to become more complicated once changes to the FIA statutes, passed by the General Assembly this week, come into effect. 

First reported by the BBC a week after Sainz announced his intention to run, these include changes to the eligibility of candidates for the presidency – including a proposal concerning “professional integrity”. This has been widely regarded as being aimed at Sainz, since his son is an active participant in the F1 World Championship, which could be interpreted as a conflict of interest.

There is also a proposal to bring forward the deadline for candidates to announce their ‘list’, from 21 days before the election to 49 days.

What’s at stake

Very few FIA presidents could claim to be uniformly popular and Ben Sulayem has encountered several bumps in the road, some of his own making.

One of his first tasks (in the F1 world at least) when he was appointed as president at the end of 2021 was to clean up the mess left by that season’s finale, in which race director Michael Masi deviated from the rules in order to stage a green-flag finish after a late safety car, but in doing so affected the outcome of the drivers’ title.

For the most part Ben Sulayem has rubbed along well with the other stakeholders, despite some ructions with the teams and F1 itself over the invitation to tender for an 11th position on the grid.

Ben Sulayem’s bailiwick at the FIA also includes motoring matters and road safety

Photo by: Getty Images

The drivers, though, have repeatedly complained about what they see as inconsistency in terms of stewarding guidelines, and pettifogging issues such as jewellery and choice of vocabulary being the subject of direct interventions from the top. There have also been inexplicable firings, such as the dismissal of F1 race director Niels Wittich last year.

But, again, the goldfish bowl of F1 is but one of many smaller elements in the broader scope of the FIA’s activities. When Ben Sulayem took over as president, the FIA was running at a double-digit financial loss; it has recently reported an operating profit of €4.7million.

Ben Sulayem has also led initiatives to boost participation in karting and other grassroots motorsports, encourage more women to participate in motor racing, and to curb online abuse of race officials (this on top of establishing an official ‘pathway’ for stewards and race directors).

“When professional processes are not adhered to and stakeholders are excluded from decision-making, it undermines the foundation of a strong organisation” Natalie Robyn

There have also been questions raised about historic demeaning remarks made about women, and a move towards centralisation of power. When Ben Sulayem was campaigning, his manifesto included the appointment of a CEO to oversee the FIA’s activities and run the governing body like a business, with all the transparency that entails.

That CEO, Natalie Robyn, quit after 18 months. In the wake of Robert Reid’s recent resignation from his deputy president of sport role, Robyn went on record for the first time, saying: “During my tenure as CEO, I worked under challenging circumstances to strengthen the federation’s governance framework and upgrade its operational transparency.

“The resignation of the deputy president of sport clearly indicates there are serious ongoing structural challenges. When professional processes are not adhered to and stakeholders are excluded from decision-making, it undermines the foundation of a strong organisation.”

Reid’s resignation statement spoke of “a fundamental breakdown in governance standards within motorsport’s global governing body”.

While Ben Sulayem has turned the FIA from loss-maker to profit-generator, he’s also a divisive figure

Photo by: Sam Bagnall / Motorsport Images

Critics of the current regime cast Ben Sulayem as a martinet who dislikes dissent and has become paranoid about leaks – among the bones of contention has been the introduction of new confidentiality agreements, which Motorsport UK chairman David Richards described as “a gagging order”.

Another peculiar development has been the announcement that the FIA would be taking the promotion of the World Rallycross Championship in-house – a breach of the separation between church and state that has prevailed since the governing body was investigated by the EU’s Competitions Commission 25 years ago.

These questions will be mulled behind closed doors – and, of course, in public via the inevitable leaks – over the coming months. Provided Sainz actually comes up with a ‘list’, officially puts his hat into the ring, and weathers the inevitable questions about conflict of interest.

If not, one of the other putative candidates waiting to see which way the wind is blowing might step out of the shadows…

Mosley was re-elected unopposed for four terms and survived a vote of no confidence

Photo by: Sutton Images

The past challengers

It’s rare indeed for an incumbent president to be challenged in an election. When Max Mosley replaced Jean-Marie Balestre in 1993, Mosley was already the president of FISA (the FIA’s sporting arm, then separate) and had been so for two years; he persuaded Balestre to step aside and accept the role of chairman of the yet-to-be-formed FIA Senate.

Mosley’s strategy of offering to do the job for free and stand for re-election a year later swung the numbers towards him and his only challenger, Royal Automobile Club vice-president Jeffrey Rose, withdrew before a vote was cast.

Given how polarising Mosley was, it’s remarkable to reflect that he was re-elected unopposed for four terms, and survived a vote of no confidence in 2008 after his sexual peccadillos were revealed in a Sunday newspaper.

At the next set of elections, Todt faced something no recent incumbent had encountered before: a challenger

Four years earlier he had theatrically announced his resignation, only to rescind it within a month, saying the FIA Senate and member clubs had bombarded him with messages begging him to stay.

After stepping down in 2009, Mosley threw his weight behind Jean Todt’s campaign and did his utmost to scupper the opposing candidate, Ari Vatanen. At the next set of elections, Todt faced something no recent incumbent had encountered before: a challenger.

David Ward quit his post as director general of the FIA Institute and announced his intention to run in August 2013, setting out a manifesto of reforming FIA governance, including the appointment of a CEO to look after motorsport affairs (sound familiar?).

But, like Rose before him, he ultimately withdrew – in this case because Todt had moved the goalposts in terms of how many regional vice-presidents were required to support his candidacy.

This article is one of many in the new monthly issue of Autosport magazine. For more premium content, take a look at the July 2025 issue and subscribe today.

Todt faced a challenger promising to reform FIA governance, but he withdrew after criticising the election process

Photo by: Getty Images