The Asian Weightlifting Federation is set to hold its annual Congress on Tuesday in Gandhinagar, India, ahead of the opening ceremony of the Asian Weightlifting Championships, with the adoption of a new constitution among the key agenda items.
However, documents and correspondence obtained by Inside The Games show that the proposed constitution has drawn sharp criticism from several national federations, which are urging the AWF to postpone its adoption to allow for substantial revisions.
Although the previous constitution expired in 2024, the AWF delayed the process of drafting a replacement. Work on the new document only began in 2025, when the federation’s leadership initiated preparations. Member federations were invited to submit recommendations, but many of their proposals were reportedly rejected on the grounds that they had been submitted after the deadline — a claim disputed by the federations, which have presented time-stamped evidence to support their position.
The strongest objections have come from the Singapore Weightlifting Federation and its president, former IWF Executive Board member Tom Liaw. Liaw has questioned the legality of the draft, arguing that it was prepared by a so-called “Working Group” despite the Executive Board allegedly ignoring most proposals submitted by member federations.
“Pursuant to Article 3.4.5 of the AWF Constitution, member federations are explicitly granted the right to submit proposals for amendments to the Constitution,” Liaw wrote. “Article 4.2, which outlines the functions of the Executive Board, grants no such authority to the EB. Furthermore, the Constitution makes no reference whatsoever to any ‘Working Group,’ rendering its authority entirely without legal basis.”
He added: “The failure to consider proposals submitted by duly authorized member federations, combined with the presentation of a draft prepared by unauthorized entities, constitutes a serious breach of the AWF Constitution.”
The second area of concern is the reduction of Congress’s powers, as the draft states it is not usually a legislative body and does not amend the Constitution. Constitutional amendments would also be permitted once every four years. According to Liaw, these changes would reduce the annual Congress to a mere consultative conference.
“This provision is deeply concerning, as it fundamentally diminishes the authority and democratic role of the Congress, which should serve as the supreme legislative body of the Federation,” he states.
In its letter, another member federation stated that matters such as the bylaws or constitutional changes “must be put to Congress and should not be approved merely by the Executive Board or any other body”.
Financial transparency is also under fire. According to the new amendments, the Electoral Congress will approve financial administrative reports every four years instead of the current annual requirement. Constitutional amendments would also only be permitted once every four years. The SWF claims that, following the changes, members would be deprived of their fundamental right to annual financial transparency and regular participation in constitutional governance.
Another key issue concerns leadership term and age limits. During a closed meeting earlier this year, IWF President and AWF Vice President Mohammed Jalood reportedly described age limits as “discrimination” and cited 84-year-old International Handball Federation President Hassan Moustafa as an example of long-serving leadership.
The draft constitution removes limits on terms for the President, General Secretary and Executive Board, while also eliminating age restrictions for candidates. It further states that individuals who have served one electoral cycle on the Executive Board or committees are eligible to run again.
The Singapore Weightlifting Federation, led by former IWF Executive Board member Tom Liaw, argued that the provisions on age and term limits require further review, while other federations said a single term is too short and should be extended to at least two.
Liaw also raised concerns over judicial independence, warning that a clause giving the Executive Board authority to sanction members who damage the AWF’s reputation could undermine independent governance.
Additional criticism focuses on the draft’s relationship with IWF rules. Some federations oppose a clause stating that the AWF constitution is not bound by the IWF constitution except on technical and anti-doping matters, especially as the IWF is currently revising its own governing framework.
The SWF noted that the existing AWF constitution requires alignment with IWF regulations and that constitutional amendments must receive IWF approval before taking effect. It has therefore requested proof that the draft was formally submitted to and approved by the IWF.
Several federations have now called for the draft to be withdrawn and revised before any vote takes place. One described the current proposal as a “weak and inadequate governance framework,” while Liaw urged the AWF to allow more time for consultation and alignment with IWF governance standards.
