
Charade
Since FIFA’s decision in December 2010 to have Russia and Qatar host the worldâs most popular sportâs championship matches, FIFA has stage-managed a marvellous reform charade.
Responding to the media maelstrom that arose immediately after FIFAâs stunning announcement that the World Cup would be held in Russia in 2018 and in Qatar in 2022, five-time FIFA president, Sepp Blatter, announced a âRoadmap to Reform.â This cynical roadmap, which Blatter declared successfully completed in 2013, has led nowhere.
Blatterâs Roadmap included several steps. In 2011 FIFA requested the international anti-corruption NGO, Transparency International (TI), to propose internal reforms for FIFA. FIFA also requested that Swiss Professor Mark Pieth propose his own corporate governance reforms.
In 2012 FIFA reorganised its ethics committee and revised its ethics code. Additionally, an âindependentâ governance committee (IGC) was established with but two genuinely independent corporate governance experts, plus six FIFA insiders and four others. Such was FIFAâs understanding of âindependence”.
As requested, TI did prepare a corporate governance reform report entitled Safe Hands. However, TI withdrew from participation on the IGC, when it learned that this âindependentâ committee would not be able to review past-reported abuses and that FIFA was to pay the IGC chairman, Mark Pieth, $128,000 plus $5000 per day.
Alexandra Wrage, president of the international anti-corruption group, Trace, and one of the genuinely independent IGC experts, later withdrew from the IGC, declaring that FIFA was âneuteringâ some fairly uncontroversial corporate governance proposals. She also described chairman Pieth as Sepp Blatterâs poodle, whatever that might tell us.
The report reviewing these three separate attempts to bring corporate governance standards to FIFA (TIâs Safe Hands), the separate Mark Pieth report and the IGC noted that of a total of 59 recommendations for reform proposed by these efforts, FIFA adopted a grand total of seven, with ten more partially adopted. The remaining 42 were completely ignored.
Instructive ethics
The record of the FIFA ethics committee is particularly instructive. FIFA hired former United States Attorney Michael Garcia to head the newly created Investigative Chamber of this committee.
Garcia was asked to review the process that led to the selection of Russia and Qatar as future World Cup venues. Garciaâs two-year investigation concluded with a confidential 454-page report.
This Garcia Report was reviewed by the new adjudicative chamber of the ethics committee, led by Hans Eckert, a German judge. In late 2014 Eckert published a 42-page summary of the Garcia Report and announced that Garcia had found no discrepancies in the 2010 selection process.
One notable quote from the Eckert summary referred to a finding in the Garcia Report that bribes had been paid in connection with the voting on the World Cup venues. Eckert stated: âTo assume … that envelopes of full of cash [$40,000] are given in exchange for votes on a World Cup host is naĂŻve.â
Whatever might be said about Michael Garcia, it is asinine to say he is naĂŻve. Now a judge on New York Stateâs highest court, Garcia is the former federal prosecutor who brought down New Yorkâs sitting governor and prosecuted both the 1993 World Trade Center bombers and those involved in the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Garcia characterised Eckertâs 42-page summary as containing âmaterially incomplete and erroneous representations of facts and conclusionsâ and demanded the publication of his entire report. When FIFA refused, Garcia resigned in disgust.
So much for FIFA âreformâ
Recapping the indignant withdrawals of TI, Alexandra Wrage and Michael Garcia, each found FIFAâs reform propaganda hypocritical and insincere.
And now we have Domenico Scala quitting in disgust after the FIFA council was given the power to remove members of both the audit and compliance committee and FIFAâs ethics committee who âbreach their obligations”.
Where did Blatterâs Roadmap lead? Although FIFA, as a billion-dollar Swiss tax-free enterprise, can afford the worldâs best corporate governance and anti-corruption experts, the FIFA track record on actual reform is tragically laughable.
As we know, the US Justice Department indicted more than 40 FIFA-affiliated individuals and legal entities in 2015. President Blatter, however, was not indicted.
Once the indictments were announced, however, the Swiss commenced their own investigation, eventually causing FIFA to ban Blatter from football for six years for a questionable $2m payment to Blatterâs deputy, Jerome Valcke, the FIFA general secretary. Valcke too has now been banned from football.
Snow White
The election of President Blatterâs successor occurred at a special meeting of FIFA in February 2016. Several weeks prior to the election there were seven declared candidates, each a man from within the FIFA ecosystem.
One headline referred to these candidates as the âSeven dwarvesâand nary a Snow White in sight“. Gianni Infantino, the general secretary of UEFA (the European football association) since 2009, was elected to succeed Blatter.
At FIFAâs annual meeting held in May 2016, FIFA confirmed Infantinoâs choice of Samba Samoura, a former United Nations official, to be FIFAâs general secretary.
This is an undeniably positive step. Samoura, the only woman executive at FIFA, comes from outside the indelibly corrupt FIFA ecosystem. Could she be the âSnow Whiteâ, someone who can actually commence reform?
Samoura, as FIFAâs second in command, appears to have a great opportunity to reform FIFA. And should Infantino be required to step aside, especially since the recent âPanama Papersâ disclosures reportedly included references to him, Samoura may have an even greater opportunity to clean up the organisation.
If Samoura does effect positive change within the once-irremediably corrupt FIFA, and if she can avoid concluding that she too must publicly resign as TI, Wrage, Garcia and Scala have done, then, for the first time in FIFAâs sordid, corrupt history, the road to reform may begin.
Bruce W. Bean is a professor of law at Michigan State University.



