Czech grandmaster David Navara has joined the growing public debate over whether former world champion Vladimir Kramnik should face punishment from FIDE following his ongoing conflict with the late Daniel Naroditsky.
While thousands of chess fans on platforms like Lichess and X (formerly Twitter) are calling for Kramnik to be banned or stripped of his titles, Navara — known for his calm temperament and moral clarity — has offered a more measured view.
“Revoking titles is not a good idea,” Navara wrote in a Lichess discussion thread. “Stripping him of the GM title would be absurd as well. But perhaps FIDE could force GM Kramnik to pay his earnings from those matches to Danya’s family.”
A More Constructive Punishment
Navara’s suggestion stands out for its practicality. Since Kramnik is retired and no longer competes in official events, a suspension would carry little weight. Instead, Navara proposed a financial penalty — specifically, redirecting the money Kramnik earned from his high-profile online matches against Peruvian grandmaster José Martínez Alcántara to Naroditsky’s family.
“Money would not repair the damage,” Navara added, “but I see no better way how an inactive player could be adequately punished.”
It’s worth noting that Kramnik didn’t simply act as a crusader—he monetized his platform. In the 2024 “Clash of Blames” match against José Martínez Alcántara, Kramnik took home a prize of €12,000 (about US $14,000) while his opponent earned €8,000. Although modest by the standards of elite chess, this still represents a paid platform—one where Kramnik spotlighted issues of cheating while building his personal brand and income streams. Navara argues that if Kramnik is making money from his public presence and titles, then redirecting earnings like this may be the clearest way for FIDE to apply meaningful discipline.
FIDE’s Dilemma: How Do You Punish a Retired Champion?
Navara’s comment touches on a deeper issue facing FIDE: what sanctions are appropriate for a player who no longer participates in tournaments but continues to use his reputation and titles to influence public opinion?
Current FIDE regulations allow the revocation of a title if it is used “to subvert the ethical principles of the title or rating system.” However, experts say the rule was written with cheating cases in mind, not public harassment or defamation.
As one Lichess user noted, “A ban from FIDE events doesn’t really affect him at all [as he’s inactive already], so potentially a stronger measure is needed.”
A History Between Navara and Kramnik
Navara’s involvement in this discussion carries special weight. Earlier this year, he revealed in a personal blog post that Kramnik’s online accusations had a severe emotional impact on him, even leading him to experience suicidal thoughts.
It’s worth noting that when he was alive, Daniel Naroditsky often defended David Navara from Kramnik’s accusations on his stream, without talking much about how he himself had been accused by Kramnik.
“A bitter old man used his title to continuously and baselessly attack the reputation of another well-respected FIDE member,” one commenter summarized Navara’s sentiment. “Now we have lost him [Naroditsky], and Kramnik continues to add insult to injury.”
A detail often cited by peers to illustrate Navara’s character is his sportsmanship at the World Cup 2011: in the game Alexander Moiseenko vs. David Navara (Queen’s Indian Defense), after a long struggle Navara offered a draw while actually holding a winning position. Earlier in that game Navara had accidentally touched a piece; Moiseenko did not insist on the touch-move rule that would have cost him the game. Moiseenko was subsequently outplayed by the Czech GM, and with a forced mate on the board Navara nonetheless offered a draw. That episode is frequently referenced as an example of Navara’s integrity and restraint — traits that shape his current call for measured, ethical accountability rather than vindictive punishment.
Kramnik’s Silence and FIDE’s Investigation
As of late October 2025, Kramnik remains under investigation by FIDE’s Ethics and Disciplinary Commission following public pressure and a petition exceeding 37,000 signatures. The petition accuses him of cyber harassment and defamation, citing his repeated online accusations against multiple grandmasters.
Kramnik, in an October 25 statement, defended himself, claiming he had been “unjustly attacked” and that his past requests for fair play investigations were “ignored.” He also said he was “ready to assist the criminal investigation in the United States” regarding Naroditsky’s death.
FIDE has not yet announced whether any formal sanctions will follow, but sources indicate that disciplinary action — possibly including temporary suspension from FIDE membership or removal from official events — is being discussed. “Any punishments are possible”, FIDE President Arkady Dvorkovich said.
I’m the senior editor of Attacking Chess, a keen chess player, rated above 2300 in chess.com. You can challenge me or asking questions at Chess.com.
