The upcoming FIA presidential election is facing growing scrutiny, as legal challenges and procedural concerns cast a shadow over the process.
At the center of the dispute is a hearing that could determine whether the election stands as valid or is subject to review, challenge, or even annulment. That decision hinges on objections raised by candidate candidate Natalie Robyn Villars, which are set to be addressed in court for the first time.
Villars, who declared her candidacy in September, has been vocal about the structural barriers she encountered during the nomination process. Under FIA rules, every presidential candidate must submit a full slate of vice-presidential nominees-one from each of the FIA’s global regions. But with only 29 names on the official list of eligible candidates and just one from South America-Fabiana Ecclestone, who is already aligned with incumbent Mohammed Ben Sulayem-Villars and fellow hopeful Tim Mayer were effectively blocked from fulfilling that requirement.
In simple terms: no South American candidate available, no way to submit a complete list, no chance to run. That’s not just a logistical hurdle-it’s a fundamental roadblock that leaves only one viable candidate in the race.
Villars has formally raised concerns about what she calls the “impossibility of presenting an alternative list” and the “unprecedented situation of a single eligible candidate” from South America. Her objections go beyond just the mechanics of the nomination process. She’s also questioning whether the FIA’s electoral procedures align with the organization’s own stated principles-governance, democracy, and integrity.
Tim Mayer, who bowed out of the race in October, echoed similar frustrations. At the time, he accused the FIA of lacking transparency and creating what he described as “the illusion of democracy.”
The FIA, for its part, has pushed back against those claims. A spokesperson previously defended the process, calling it “structured and democratic,” and emphasizing that fairness and integrity are built into every stage of the election.
Still, the fact remains: the current system left two credible candidates on the outside looking in, not because of lack of support or vision, but because of a procedural bottleneck tied to the availability of eligible vice-presidential candidates.
Now, with the hearing looming, the outcome could have significant implications-not just for this election, but for how the FIA governs itself moving forward. If the court finds merit in Villars’ claims, it could force a reevaluation of the electoral framework that underpins leadership transitions within one of motorsport’s most powerful governing bodies.
This isn’t just about who gets to sit at the head of the table. It’s about whether the table is set fairly for anyone to take a seat in the first place.