Petition Seeks to Ban Kramnik: What It Means and What Could Come of It

An online petition launched after the death of Grandmaster Daniel Naroditsky is calling on the International Chess Federation (FIDE) to ban Kramnik, strip him of all titles, and impose other sanctions. More than 18,000 supporters had signed the petition as of October 25, 2025.
The petition — hosted on Change.org — addresses FIDE’s Ethics & Disciplinary Commission (EDC) and accuses Kramnik of “insensitive, speculative and damaging” conduct in the wake of Naroditsky’s passing. According to the article from the Daily Mail, supporters say Kramnik violated FIDE’s ethical code and harmed the broader chess community.

Below we break down what a petition like this can achieve, how FIDE’s sanction process works, and what to realistically expect.

What a Petition Can Do

1. Raise awareness and public pressure.
A petition of this size sends a strong signal that many in the public and chess community believe something must be done. Although not legally binding, it can prompt governing bodies to act.
In this case, the petition highlights public outrage over Kramnik’s repeated accusations, especially against Naroditsky, and demands formal disciplinary steps.

2. Focus attention on decision-makers.
The petition calls on FIDE’s Ethics & Disciplinary Commission to open formal proceedings. By naming specific articles of FIDE’s Ethics & Disciplinary Code, supporters attempt to frame the issue as one of institutional governance and responsibility.

3. Serve as a record and reference.
Whether or not the petition leads to a sanction, it becomes a public document citing concerns about conduct, ethics and accountability in chess. It may be referenced in future complaints or investigations.

4. Influence stakeholder behaviour.
Sponsors, media, tournament organisers and federations often monitor public sentiment. A widely supported petition can affect reputational risks and prompt more cautious behaviour or independent action by others in the chess ecosystem.

How FIDE’s Discipline Process Works

According to FIDE’s Ethics & Disciplinary Code (effective 1 April 2022), and previous versions, here are key features:

– Who handles the case?
Complaints are submitted to the Ethics & Disciplinary Commission (EDC) of FIDE. The EDC has the power to investigate and sanction players, officials and other chess-related persons.

– Admissibility and investigation.
A complaint must meet certain criteria (e.g., admissibility). The EDC may open a case, gather evidence, allow defence, and hold proceedings.

– Types of misconduct.
The Code lists offences such as:

• Article 11: Disciplinary offences (e.g., “causing reputational harm” to FIDE).
• Article 12: Provisional suspension and other measures during an investigation.
• Article 13: Sanctions — these may include reprimands, fines, bans, revocation of titles.

– Possible sanctions.
Historical examples show that FIDE can impose:

• Fines (past code mentioned up to US$25,000)
• Revocation of titles or awards
• Temporary or permanent bans from competitions or chess-related activities
• Provisional suspension while investigation is ongoing

– Appeal and enforcement.
Once a decision is made, it may be appealed within FIDE’s rules or via the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in certain cases.

What the Petition Could Lead To — and What It Might Not

What could happen:

1. The EDC opens formal disciplinary proceedings against Kramnik based on the petition and other complaints.
2. Kramnik could be provisionally suspended while the case is investigated.
3. If found in breach of FIDE’s ethical code, sanctions might include a ban, revocation of titles or public reprimand.
4. The case could influence future policy changes within FIDE around communication, harassment and social-media behaviour.

What is less likely or uncertain:

1. The petition’s signature count (18k+) is symbolic — FIDE does not set a published threshold for action based solely on petition numbers.
2. Sanctions may take many months or even years to conclude. Investigation and due process are time-consuming.
3. A complete ban or title revocation is possible, but depends on the evidence, nature of the breach, precedent and disciplinary panel’s decision.
4. The petition does not guarantee legal liability or criminal charges — the EDC deals with chess-governance matters, not criminal law.

Why the Petition Matters

Even if it does not immediately lead to dramatic sanctions, the petition marks an important moment for accountability in chess. It underlines:

1. That accusations and public commentary — especially from high-profile individuals — have serious consequences for reputation and mental health.
2. That governing bodies like FIDE are being called to act more transparently and decisively when misconduct is alleged.
3. That the chess community expects standards of dignity, respect, and fairness, not just competitive performance.
4. That social media and streaming culture in chess have transformed how influence works — and how misconduct may spread or be amplified.

In Plain Terms — What You Should Know

1. Signing a petition helps register public concern, but it is only the first step.
2. FIDE’s Ethics & Disciplinary process is the formal avenue for sanctioning.
3. Past cases show sanctions can include bans and title revocations, but each case is judged on its own merits.
4. Action may take time, and outcome is not guaranteed.
5. The petition keeps the spotlight on behaviour, which may affect how individuals and organisations act in future.

What Happens Next?

1. The EDC may acknowledge receipt of the petition and decide whether to open an investigation.
2. If an investigation is opened, evidence will be collected — including messages, social-media posts, witness statements or other documentation.
3. A hearing or review may follow, then a decision on sanctions.
4. If Kramnik receives a sanction, it may set precedent: how high-profile individuals are held accountable in the chess world.

For readers of this story — the key takeaway is this: the petition is not just a gesture. It is public pressure aimed at triggering formal procedure.
How FIDE responds will reveal much about the organisation’s willingness and capability to enforce its own ethical standards.