Mohammed Ben Sulayem will run for a second four-year term as FIA president in December, stating he would welcome any rival candidate and is committed to growing motorsport and strengthening Formula One’s governing body. Speaking to Reuters at the Monaco Grand Prix, the Emirati mentioned he made the decision, which was widely expected, after consulting with International Automobile Federation members. “I believe three years in a complex federation like the FIA is not enough,” the 63-year-old former rally driver explained, openly declaring his re-election bid for the first time. He expressed pride in the accomplishments under his leadership and saw no reason to change his approach in a second term. “Do I need more time? Yes. Has it been easy? Never. Has it been enjoyable? Sometimes. So, I am going to stand. I consulted with most of the members. I speak to them.” The Emirati emphasized his desire to “keep growing motorsport and make the FIA stronger and stronger. This is my ambition and what I intend to do.” He suggested that the FIA, which ultimately owns the Formula One championship although the long-term commercial rights are held by Liberty Media, had been “neglected.” “Raw deals have been given to the FIA. It doesn’t make sense to me that one Formula One driver and one team principal make more money than all of the FIA, and the FIA owns the championship. Is that fair?” Ben Sulayem’s first term, since his election in 2021, succeeding former Ferrari team boss Jean Todt, has been marked by controversy. The FIA under Mohammed Ben Sulayem has had its fair share of controversies. So much so that Ben Sulayem has his own ‘controversies’ section on Wikipedia. Yet, it seems as if there is very little to be done to hold the sitting FIA President accountable. There have been disputes with Liberty Media over commercial matters, accusations of sexism, and he has angered drivers in both rallying and Formula One by imposing heavy fines for swearing. Senior staff have left the FIA, leading to reports of an exodus, and questions have been raised about statute changes that critics say will limit the powers of audit and ethics committees. (with agency inputs)