Editor's note: This report compiles all relevant news, events and materials on International and European Sports Law based on the daily coverage provided on our twitter feed @Sportslaw_asser. You are invited to complete this survey via the comments section below, feel free to add links to important cases, documents and articles we might have overlooked. 

The Headlines 

Anti-doping whereabouts requirements declared compatible with the athletes' right to privacy and family life

On 18 January 2018, the European Court of Human Rights rendered a judgment with important consequences for the world of sport in general and the anti-doping regime in particular. The Strasbourg-based court was called upon to decide whether the anti-doping whereabouts system – which requires that a limited number of top elite athletes provide their National Anti-Doping Organisation or International Federation with regular information about their location, including identifying for each day one specific 60-minute time slot where the athlete will be available for testing at a pre-determined location – is compatible with the athletes' right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and their freedom of movement pursuant to Article 2 Protocol No. 4 of the Convention. The case was brought by the French cyclist Jeannie Longo and five French athlete unions that had filed their application on behalf of 99 professional handball, football, rugby, and basketball players.

While acknowledging that the whereabouts requirements clash with the athletes' right to private and family life, the judges took the view that such a restriction is necessary in order to protect the health of athletes and ensure a level playing field in sports competitions. They held that ''the reduction or removal of the relevant obligations would lead to an increase in the dangers of doping for the health of sports professionals and of all those who practise sports, and would be at odds with the European and international consensus on the need for unannounced testing as part of doping control''. Accordingly, the judges found no violation of Article 8 of the Convention and, in a similar vein, ruled that Article 2 Protocol No. 4 of the Convention was not applicable to the case.

Football stakeholders preparing to crack down on agents' excessive fees

It has been a record-breaking January transfer window with Premier League clubs having spent an eye-watering £430 million on signing new acquisitions. These spiralling transfer fees enable football agents, nowadays also called intermediaries, to charge impressive sums for their services. However, this might soon no longer be the case as the main stakeholders in European football are preparing to take action. UEFA, FIFPro, the European Club Association and the European Professional Football Leagues acknowledge in their joint resolution that the 2015 FIFA Regulations on Working with Intermediaries failed to address serious concerns in relation to the activities of intermediaries/agents. They recognise in broad terms that a more effective regulatory framework is needed and call among other things for a reasonable and proportionate cap on fees for intermediaries/agents, enhanced transparency and accountability, or stronger provisions to protect minors.

The CAS award in Joseph Odartei Lamptey v. FIFA 

On 15 January 2018, FIFA published on its website an arbitral award delivered on 4 August 2017 by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in the dispute between the Ghanian football referee Joseph Odartei Lamptey and FIFA. The CAS sided with FIFA and dismissed the appeal filed by Mr Lamptey against an earlier decision of the FIFA Appeal Committee which (i) found him to have violated Article 69(1) of the FIFA Disciplinary Code as he unlawfully influenced the 2018 World Cup qualifying match between South Africa and Senegal that took place on 12 November 2016; (ii) as a consequence, banned him for life from taking part in any football-related activity; and (iii) ordered the match in question to be replayed. In reaching its conclusion, the CAS relied heavily on multiple reports of irregular betting activities that significantly deviated from usual market developments. 

Sports Law Related Decisions

• CAS – Award delivered in the arbitration between Joseph Odartei Lamptey and FIFA
• CAS – Award delivered in the arbitration between the Virgin Islands Olympic Committee and the International Olympic Committee
• CAS – Award delivered in the arbitration between WADA and Gil Roberts
• European Court of Human Rights – Judgment on the compatibility of the anti-doping whereabouts rules with the fundamental rights of athletes

Official Documents and Press Releases

• CAS – CAS declares Lao Toyota Football Club eligible to participate in the 2018 AFC Cup
• CAS – CAS does not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federatio
• CAS – CAS has opened its temporary offices on the site of the Pyeongchang Winter Olympic Games
• CAS – CAS has registered 42 appeals filed by Russian athletes against the Disciplinary Commission of the International Olympic Committee
• CAS – Dutee Chand case: The application of the IAAF Hyperandrogenism Regulations remain suspended
• Council of Europe – FIFA and the Council of Europe to promote human rights
• FIFA – Global Transfer Market Report: A review of all international football transfers in 2017
• FIFA – Guidance on the Bid Rules of Conduct for the process to select the host(s) of the 2026 FIFA World Cup
• FIFA – Normalisation committee appointed for the Kuwait FA
• FIFA – Statement on CAS decision relating to match official Joseph Odartei Lamptey
• FIFPro – Belounis settles with Qatari club
• IOC – International Testing Agency (ITA) moves closer to being operational
• IOC – IOC issues Conduct Guidelines for Olympic Athlete from Russia delegation
• IOC – Olympic Athlete from Russia (OAR) Invitation Review Panel releases list of information used as part of its deliberations
• IOC – Reduced pool of Russian athletes and officials who can be considered for invitation to Pyeongchang 2018 determined
• Tennis Integrity Unit – Annual Review 2017
• UEFA – Club Licensing Benchmarking Report: Financial Year 2016
• UEFA – EU Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee for Professional Football: Resolution on intermediaries/agents
• UEFA – Professional Football Strategy Council meets in Nyon
• UEFA – UEFA bans six Malta under-21 players for match-fixing offences
• WADA – WADA announces that 2018 List of Prohibited Substances and Methods is now in force
• WADA – WADA investigates potential integrity issue with new generation BEREG-KIT Geneva security bottles
• WADA – WADA's fifth World Conference on Doping in Sport to be held in November 2019

In the news

Doping

• Andrew Aloia Ryan Bailey: Ex-England and Great Britain prop avoids ban after 'landmark' drugs case
• Nick Butler European Court dismisses claim anti-doping whereabouts system violates human rights
• Nick Butler NADOs criticise IOC for not revealing criteria for Russian eligibility at Pyeongchang 2018
• Nick Butler Russian sliders still eligible to compete in IBSF events after CAS decide against ruling
• Daniel Etchells Russia work on sanctions against WADA officials in response to Pyeongchang 2018 ban
• Martha Kelner and Sean Ingle Chris Froome says report of plea bargain over failed drug test 'completely untrue'
• Victor Mather and Rebecca R. Ruiz Russia is barred from Winter Olympics. Russia is sending 169 athletes to Winter Olympics
• Reuters IOC 'concerned' about potential integrity issues with testing bottles
• Rebecca R. Ruiz American sprinter used 'passionate kissing' defence in doping case. And it worked
• Rebecca R. Ruiz IOC clears nearly 400 Russians to compete in Winter Games
• Rebecca R. Ruiz Russia is banned from Paralympics, again, for doping

Football

• Global Legal Post Mainz 05 obtains landmark ruling on temporary contracts
• Martha Kelner Chelsea racism allegations: Four more players to take legal action against club
• Thomas Klein Training in Qatar: 'Bayern Munich cannot remain silent'
• Tariq Panja Critics say FIFA is stalling a doping inquiry as World Cup nears
• Sky Sports Michel Platini takes FIFA ban appeal to European Court of Human Rights
• Sky Sports Prosecutors investigating FIFA payment to head of Austrian Football Federation

Other

• David Conn The Lawn Tennis Association launches review into procedural failings over jailed tennis coach
• Mike Dunne Show jumping awaits competition body ruling
• SportBusiness International Force India, Sauber witdraw EU complaint against Formula One

Blog 

Asser International Sports Law Blog

• Stefano Bastianon The ISU Commission's Decision and the Slipery Side of Eligibility Rules
• Tomáš Grell Human Rights as Selection Criteria in Bidding Regulations for Mega-Sporting Events – Part II: FIFA and Comparative Overview

Law in Sport

• Nick Fitzpatrick and Ruth Hoy The major global challenges in managing data to protect sporting integrity
• Graham Gilbert Athlete cocaine use: The cases of Dale Swift, Graham Gibbons and Dan Evans
• Alex Haffner Why the International Skating Union was found in breach of EU competition law
• Manali Kulkarni and Sean Cottrell Key sports law cases and developments to watch in 2018: Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia and Australia
• Manali Kulkarni and Sean Cottrell Key sports law cases of 2017: Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia and Australia
• Nick Tsatsas Will the FA score with its adoption of the Rooney Rule?
• Sophie Wilkinson and Adam Leadercramer Key information on the General Data Protection Regulation for the sports industry

Others

• Jens Sejer Andersen European politicians demand radical change of sports governance
• Andy Brown ECHR judgment fails to consider alternatives to 'whereabouts'
• Braham Dabscheck Why Djokovic is right to say tennis players need a union
• European Professional Football Leagues Legal Newsletter January 2018
• Nick De Marco Italian parliament enacts new regulation of football agents
• Despina Mavromati SFT Judgment 4A_312/2017: Compatibility of an agent's commission fee with public policy
• David Owen European football: A cash magnet, but is the pyramid's base starting to erode?
• Tariq Panja At African soccer event, games of cat and mouse
• Daisuke Takahashi Tokyo Olympic Sustainable Sourcing Code and its grievance mechanism in a Japanese legal context

Upcoming Events

• 16 March – Sports Law & Business Conference, Etihad Stadium, Manchester, England
• 3-4 July – 13^th Sport & EU Annual Conference, Edge Hill University, England

After the success of this year’s World Cup in Brazil, FIFA President Sepp Blatter can start concentrating on his Presidential campaign for next June’s FIFA elections. Even though the 78-year old Swiss is not officially a candidate yet, he is still very popular in large parts of the world, and therefore the favourite to win the race. Nonetheless, even for the highly experienced Mr. Blatter these elections will be different. All candidates will have to respect the newly introduced Electoral Regulations for the FIFA Presidency. 

The Electoral Regulations are the latest addition to the reform process FIFA initiated more than two years ago following the controversial awarding of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups to Russia and Qatar. The stated aim of the Regulation is to make the elections more transparent, democratic and to prevent possible corruption accusations.[1] Its legal basis is found in Article 24(4) of the 2013 FIFA Statutes and reads as follows:

“The conditions to be observed during a candidature for the office of President are stipulated in the Electoral Regulations for the FIFA Presidency. These regulations shall be issued by the Executive Committee.”

Earlier editions of the FIFA Statutes did not include a reference to electoral regulations. In comparing the 2013 Statutes with the 2010 Statutes used for the previous elections one can witness the extent of this dramatic change. Pursuant to Article 24 of the 2010 edition, “only the Members[2] may propose candidatures for the office of FIFA President. Members shall notify the FIFA general secretariat in writing in the name of a candidate for the FIFA presidency at least two months before the date of the Congress.” Furthermore, “the general secretariat shall notify the Members of the names of proposed candidates at least one month before the date of the Congress.” Other criteria regarding the eligibility of candidates were not included.

The first fundamental change to take place at the 2015 election will be the setting up of an Ad-hoc electoral Committee pursuant to Article 7(1) Electoral Regulations. The Ad-hoc Electoral Committee shall be composed of the chairman of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, the chairman of the FIFA Appeal Committee and the chairman of the FIFA Audit and Compliance Committee[3] and shall assess whether a candidate meets the profile specifications provided for by the eligibility criteria stipulated in Article 13 of the Electoral Regulations and Article 24 of the FIFA Statutes.[4]

The second fundamental change is that, in accordance with article 13(1), Candidates for the office of President must meet the following requirements:

1. The candidate shall have played an active role in association football (as a board member, committee member, referee and assistant referee, coach, trainer and any other person responsible for technical, medical or administrative matters in FIFA, a Confederation, Association, League or Club or as a player) for two of the last five years before being proposed as a candidate (cf. art. 24 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes).

2. The candidate shall have been proposed by a member association in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes.

3.  The candidate shall present declarations of support from at least five member associations (cf. art. 24 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes). Being proposed as a candidate by a member association shall be understood as a declaration of support. Each member may only present a declaration of support for one person. If a member association presents declarations of support for more than one person, all its declarations shall become invalid.

The flowchart below summarises the key procedural steps set out in the Electoral Regulations:

Has the Presidential campaign already begun?

The Presidential campaign has already started due to the fact that one person has declared himself a candidate. This person is neither Mr. Blatter nor “Europe’s favourite” Michel Platini, but former FIFA official Jérôme Champagne. Mr. Champagne, who is personally funding his own campaign, has stated that he has received the support of at least five Member Associations and that the FIFA general secretariat has been notified of his candidature. Details on which Member Associations support the Frenchman remain undisclosed.

During the last FIFA Congress that took place in Sao Paulo in June this year, the Ad-Hoc Electoral Committee was also set up consisting of Mr. Domenico Scala (ltaly), chairman of the FIFA Audit and Compliance Committee, Mr. Claudio Sulser (Switzerland), chairman of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, and Mr. Larry Mussenden (Bermuda), chairman of the FIFA Appeal Committee. The next step would be for the Ad-hoc Electoral Committee to forward the proposed candidature of Jérôme Champagne to the Ethics Committee pursuant Article 15(10) of the Electoral Regulations.

As stated above, Sepp Blatter is not yet a candidate, but it is expected that he will run for a fifth consecutive term in office. Interestingly enough, in accordance with Article 2(2) of the Electoral Regulations, “if a person engages in campaign or similar activities that give the appearance that he is a candidate, the Ad-hoc Electoral Committee or, if the Ad-hoc Electoral Committee has not yet been constituted, the FIFA Secretary general, shall give him a deadline of ten days to formally state his intention of becoming a candidate. This shall also apply for the incumbent FIFA President. Blatter hinted several times this year that he is thinking about running for President again. Nonetheless, it appears that the rule stipulated in Article 2(2) has not been applied to him (yet). With regard to the possible third candidate, Michel Platini has said that he is considering becoming a candidate and promised to make a decision by the draw for the Champions League on 28 August. 

Could the new Election Regulations jeopardise Mr. Blatter’s possible re-election ambitions?

Given that Blatter still enjoys widespread support in the “football family”, he should have no problem securing the declarations of support from five different Members. As regards the integrity check, it is worth noting that Sepp Blatter has never been personally accused of corruption. True, there has been a lot of controversies at FIFA under his watch (Qatar2022 is the latest and most acute one) and questions can be raised whether an 80-year old is the ideal candidate to run one of the world’s most important Sporting Governing Bodies for the next four years.  

Conclusion

Whether the new Election Regulations will make next year’s election more transparent and democratic will mostly depend on how they will be applied during the unfolding campaign and elections. Will Blatter’s double game as a candidate and FIFA President be closely scrutinized? On what basis and to which extent will the Ethics Committee review the candidatures? Even if the electoral regulations appear to have some teeth in practice, further reforms will still be necessary to improve FIFA’s legitimacy. One can, and Jérôme Champagne has in fact suggested it, imagine public debates between the candidates to be broadcasted worldwide. Furthermore, one should envisage that the vote must be held publically and that the number of terms as FIFA president must be restricted. There is a lot to do before FIFA could be considered, as far as it is even possible, a “democratic” organisation, but the sheer fact of having electoral regulations is already a step in the right direction.

P.S. At the beginning of July Jérôme Champagne visited the Asser institute and presented his program for the upcoming FIFA Presidential elections 2015. The video is available at:

[1] http://www.insideworldfootball.com/fifa/15040-fifa-lays-out-rules-of-engagement-in-the-battle-for-the-presidency.

[2] Member: an Association which is responsible for organising and supervising football in all of its forms in its Country that has been admitted into membership of FIFA by the Congress.

[3] Electoral Regulations for the FIFA Presidency, Article 7(2)

[4] Electoral Regulations for the FIFA Presidency, Article 8(1)d)