by Liu Fang, Jesse Wieten
THE HAGUE -- In many ways the United States is right to act against corruption in world football governing body FIFA, but a discussion on the limits of the U.S. cross-border jurisdiction is needed, a Dutch professor has said.
On May 27, seven top FIFA officials were arrested by the Swiss police acting on a U.S. request. The U.S. Department of Justice later indicted nine high-profile FIFA officials and five corporate executives on allegations of fraud, bribery and money laundering.
Marjan Olfers, professor of sports law at VU University Amsterdam, said she hopes for a healthy future for FIFA, but more importantly she wants to start a discussion on international law against corruption and the rules of individual countries.
For years no one came to correct FIFA because of the complicated web of interests, Olfers told Xinhua in an interview. "The United States is the first to do so. What makes the United States so different is that it has anti-corruption laws, different from Switzerland or the Netherlands for instance. Their jurisdiction also applies for a small link, when you use for example a U.S. bank account or a U.S. email address."
"The public opinion is that they came to rescue our game. Maybe in a way they are right. Because nobody was fighting FIFA ever ... But when it comes to legal principles I have doubt on the U.S. jurisdiction. Where does it stop? Do they rule the world?"
"I am a legal expert and I think we should at least start a discussion on the jurisdiction ... We have to start a discussion whether a country like the United States should have this power, based on the use of a bank account. That's a political question."
What FIFA needs in the future, according to Olfers, is more internal power balance and external supervision, such as by the United Nations. And in addition, the world's football governing body needs a new leader, someone who is clean and does not tolerate bribery in any form.
After the resignation of Sepp Blatter, the new FIFA president will lead the body amid continuing corruption scandals, she said. The new leader could also be faced with lawsuits and financial claims, for instance on the allocation on the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, if there would be evidence that the awards to Qatar and Russia came only because of rigged votes, she said.
The Dutch professor believes it is unlikely that Russia and Qatar could lose the right to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups even if evidence is found of corruption in the bidding process.
"From a legal perspective the allocation of the 2018 and 2022 World Cup could be changed," she said. "You can make another decision if the first decision should not have been taken because of corruption. But due to the fact that all these contracts have already been closed, stadiums are being built. I don't think it will happen."
Other nations who lost their bids either to Russia or Qatar, like the Netherlands and Belgium, are considering their options. Legal actions are possible, leading to claims of millions of euros.
"If the other candidate countries had known there was corruption they would never have spent millions of euros for the bid," Olfers said. "They can hold FIFA liable for all the damage and FIFA has to pay them."
However, Olfers doesn't advocate a court solution against FIFA. "It is not that I am saying not to go to court, but be clever: There are politics behind it."
"What is the goal, to change FIFA?" Olfers asked. "Is this the best way, to fight in court? I would do it in a different way. Maybe they can reach a settlement, make an agreement to make FIFA a more healthy organization for the future."
