Vizer, who a year ago opened the 2015 SportAccord General Assembly in Sochi by heavily criticising the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and its President Thomas Bach, resigned from his SportAccord position little more than a month later amid a flurry of withdrawals of International Federations.

He has since played a far lower-profile role on the sporting stage, although he remains President of the International Judo Federation (IJF).

Vizer showed that he is still an influence in the Olympic Movement today with a series of interventions designed to show support for the governing bodies during the Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF) General Assembly.

"You say we are totally supporting the Olympic Movement," he asked ASOIF President Francesco Ricci Bitti following the raising of concerns surrounding the Rio 2016 Olympic Games.

"We are the Olympic Movement and the role of the ASOIF should be to coordinate, correct, help and support implementation of different Ifs in dealing with organisers.

"In the case of Rio [2016], we feel we have been the victim of voting and political decisions and how we now need to clean up things which are not ready in time, or things that are affected by lack of budget."

He then called for a strategy of coordination from ASOIF, to liaise with Ifs and organisers.

His words were designed to consider a rethink of the involvement of International Federations rather than specifically to criticise the host city selection process, he said afterwards, although he did not go so far as to suggest how exactly this should happen. 

They will inevitably be interpreted as another criticism of the IOC, however, following his release of a 20-point agenda proposing radical alternatives to the IOC's Agenda 2020 reform process, including prize money at the Olympics and an overhaul of the revenue distribution system.

Vizer also questioned World Anti-Doping Agency President Sir Craig Reedie about their handling of the ban on meldonium. 

More than 200 athletes have tested positive for the recently banned substance after it was added to the prohibited list on January 1.

In a clarification released earlier this month, WADA admitted that some athletes registered small levels of the substance before March 1, with it therefore possible it could have remained in their system from being taken before the product was banned.

"I am always in favour of clean athletes," Vizer said.

"But, we can be confronted with legal situations.

"We, the IF, have to sanction athletes, and face consequences of decisions being made by you [WADA] not being made in accordance with procedures.

"How shall we proceed in cases of sanction or suspension when it looks like we have no chance [of winning]."

Sir Craig insisted that they have followed standard WADA procedure, with their clarification resulting from the preliminary findings of research which is set to be concluded in the next six months.