|
 Drawn up over the last eight months, it suggests changes to stop the
scandals that have left the organization supposed to lead the
world's most popular sport facing its greatest threat for decades.
The most obvious challenge is criminal investigations in the United
States and Switzerland that have already resulted in the indictment
of several dozen soccer officials for corruption, many of them
serving or former presidents of national or continental
associations.
U.S. prosecutors have continued to call FIFA a victim of corrupt
individuals. But if FIFA as an organization were criminally charged,
sponsors and other partners might be reluctant to do business with
it.
But that is not the only concern. In the last month, talk has
resurfaced among Europe's most powerful clubs of a breakaway
European Super League, as well as complaints about the amount of
time players spend with national teams.
National team competitions depend on a calendar agreed between FIFA
and the clubs, which commit to release players to their national
teams on certain dates.
If the clubs, which are always eager for more opportunities to play
lucrative friendlies abroad, were to pull out, it would throw
international football into chaos.
There was similar discontent in the 1990s, when European soccer's
governing body UEFA became deeply critical of Joao Havelange, the
Brazilian president of FIFA at the time.
UEFA produced proposals that included handing more power to the
continental confederations, rotating FIFA's presidency and limiting
it mainly to organizing the four-yearly World Cup.
Leading clubs including AC Milan and Manchester United then sought
to build support for a breakaway league, and top players found
themselves in a tug-of-war as clubs refused to release them for
internationals.
OLD AND NEW CHALLENGES
FIFA's response was to threaten national associations (FAs), clubs
and players with suspension if they linked up with the proposed
league, and UEFA quelled the threat by reorganizing its
competitions.
But FIFA now faces similar challenges, added to the menace of
match-fixing organized by illegal betting syndicates, all while
trying to shake off a series of scandals that have seen FIFA
president Sepp Blatter banned for ethics violations and cast a
shadow over the awarding of at least three World Cup finals.
Clearly, it cannot afford to get its reforms wrong.
"If there is not a strong FIFA, football will be grabbed by a lot of
people who have no interest in the game and want to use the game for
other reasons - political, business or even criminal," said Jerome
Champagne, one of five candidates for president.
The reform proposal on the table includes term limits for top
officials, to avoid another 18-year presidency such as Blatter's, as
well as disclosure of their salaries.
More radically, it would take responsibility for everyday business
decisions away from the "political" representatives of national
associations. These would sit on a new-look 36-member FIFA Council,
which would have at least six female members, and set a broad
strategy for world soccer.
Day-to-day management would instead pass to a new, professional
general secretariat, more akin to a corporate executive board,
which, like the Council, would be overseen by a fully independent
Audit and Compliance Committee.
[to top of second column] |
The proposals also place a greater onus on continental
confederations and national associations to police themselves.
The 209 national associations, who ultimately hold the power in FIFA
through the Congress, and vote for the president, are often seen as
a significant part of the problem.
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
Most of those indicted in the United States committed their alleged
crimes while carrying out duties for their national FAs or
continental confederations.
In November, the anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International
said the vast majority of FAs were failing to make basic information
public, creating a potential breeding ground for corruption.
"The (proposed) statutes do generally address the obligations of
confederations to observe the FIFA statutes," Transparency
researcher Gareth Sweeney told Reuters, "but they do not adequately
explain how FIFA can oversee the confederations' and the FAs'
compliance."
"FIFA is effectively answerable to its Congress, but how transparent
are its member FAs? It's clear that has been inadequate until
today."
Sweeney also bemoaned the lack of independent participants on the
FIFA Council, whose members will all be elected by the FAs.
"While that opportunity has been lost, the draft statute reforms do
cover a lot of required checks and balances that could limit the
type of corruption we have seen in the past."
Other critics believe the only way to deal with FIFA is to start all
over again.
"We believe they need to dissolve it, and by 'they' I mean the Swiss
government, they have the power to do so," said Jaimie Fuller, a
member of the New FIFA Now campaign group.
He said that FIFA's failure to organize a presidential debate with
the five candidates standing on Feb. 26, three of them with current
or former ties to FIFA, showed a lack of will to reform.
"If FIFA was genuine in saying they want to be a reformed
organization, they should have been conducting the presidential
debate themselves; instead it's the same the old system today, and
this reinforces the fact they have no desire to reform,” he said.
"It's the same men doing deals behind closed doors."
(Editing by Kevin Liffey)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
