Keeping Score Of FIFA’s Corruption, Compliance And Efforts For Reform, Part 1 Brandon Fox - October 9, 2017 Foul Play 22 members of FIFA’s top committee – the executive The first installment of this two-part series committee – would choose the tournament’s host summarizes the Garcia Report’s findings of through a majority vote. The vote often took place misconduct. Author Brandon Fox also focuses on over several rounds and involved a winnowing the difficulties investigators faced as a result of process. Initially, each member voted for one of all leaders failing to cooperate and contrasts the eligible bids. If no bid received a majority, the proposal misconduct and lack of cooperation to the U.S. with the fewest number of votes would be eliminated. Soccer Federation’s behavior. The process was repeated until one bid received a majority of the votes. In late June, the world’s governing soccer organization released the “Garcia Report,” which contained more Several countries bid to be the hosts for 2018 and/or than 400 pages chronicling the extensive corruption 2022. FIFA’s executive committee ultimately selected and conflicts of interest that occurred in FIFA’s Russia to host the 2018 World Cup and Qatar to host awarding of the men’s 2018 and 2022 World Cup the 2022 event. The Garcia Report, however, found venues.[1] The report, authored in 2014, concluded the vote was tarnished by extensive corruption and that there was prima facie evidence that a dozen collusion by executive committee members. then-current or former executive committee members committed ethical violations. The publication of the That the selection process was tainted is not Garcia Report came after other scandals by FIFA surprising, as the executive committee appeared to officials, including the prosecutions of high-ranking overlook obvious problems with the winning bids. officials in the Eastern District of New York for For example, human rights issues clearly did not corruption and fraud. receive priority with either selection. Additionally, the selection of Qatar in 2022 immediately left many The Awarding of the World Cup wondering how a country with average temperatures greater than 100 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer Venues for 2018 and 2022 (when the World Cup takes place) could win the The World Cup is the world’s most prestigious and bid. While high temperatures are an obvious safety widely viewed soccer tournament. Countries compete concern for players, coaches and fans attending the in qualifying tournaments to make the 32-team games, the Garcia Report found that the executive championship tournament, which is played every four committee simply “fail[ed] to consider the issue of years at locations selected by FIFA’s governing body. the temperature in Qatar.” Even a physician who served on the executive committee did not raise In 2010, FIFA was to choose the hosts of the 2018 concerns about the extreme heat during deliberations, and 2022 World Cup tournaments. Although it was according to the Garcia Report. Given the physician’s unusual for FIFA to pick hosts for two championships silence, it should not come as a surprise that the at the same time, the selection process otherwise was Garcia Report found that he had at least two conflicts supposed to occur in the ordinary manner. This meant of interest: First, the physician’s son received a job that countries seeking to host a tournament would at a hospital affiliated with Qatar’s training academy. submit their proposals and be evaluated. Then, the Reprinted with permission © 2017 Second, his close friend’s son received a “business In addition to the executive committee members, the opportunity” from Qatar’s bid team. But this was just Garcia Report found that other high-ranking soccer one of a dozen examples of executive committee officials abused their positions by seeking benefits members having conflicts of interest, and some were for third parties. Notably, the Garcia Report found a much more egregious illustrations of graft. prima facie case of ethical violations by the chairman of the group that evaluated bids before they came The Garcia Report Finds the up for vote. According to the Garcia Report, the Executive Committee Acted chairman, at the time of the evaluations, was trying to with Impunity convince a Qatar training academy affiliated with the country’s bid to hire the chairman’s son and to find his Many executive committee members were easy brother-in-law a position as a tennis coach. Ironically, targets to corrupt. The Garcia Report found that the the chairman of the evaluation group announced executive committee had a “culture of expectation at the end of the process, “we have accomplished and entitlement.” This was not because of a lack our work in the spirit of integrity, objectiveness and of rules governing members’ conduct. Instead, the transparency.” As a result of the chairman’s attempt to Garcia Report found that many executive committee obtain personal favors, the Garcia Report found that members displayed “a disregard for ethic guidelines his evaluation of Qatar’s bid (the winning 2022 bid) and an attitude that the rules do not apply to them.” was “tainted.” Third-Party Beneficiaries Side Deals and Hidden Interests The Garcia Report detailed several occasions when The Garcia Report discussed side deals between executive committee members sought or were offered associations intended to influence the bid process. benefits for family members and close associates. For example, the report concluded that Australia These benefits came in many forms, including jobs, provided more than $6 million to the Oceania Football consulting fees and sponsorship money. For example, Confederation in exchange for its support. Australia Australia 2022 hired a consultant who was a close also sent and promised about $4 million to benefit associate of an executive committee member. a sports facility in Trinidad and Tobago. That money The Garcia Report concluded that Australia 2022 really went to executive committee member Jack tried to disguise its relationship to the consultant’s Warner, who allegedly commingled and embezzled relationship by having a company hire him as a it. Warner was able to do this because he secretly subcontractor to “create appearance of distance.” owned parcels of land where the facility was built Australia 2022 also omitted specific language that and falsely represented to people that the facility was would have bound the consultant to FIFA’s rules. owned by the soccer organization that governs North As a result, the consultant did not have to report his America and Central America. contacts with any executive committee member or cooperate with the investigation into misconduct, Additionally, bid countries paid for executive unlike those governed by FIFA’s rules. committee members’ soccer clubs to travel to tournaments and friendly matches (i.e., exhibition Some of the benefits given to influence executive games). While some of this was done in the ordinary committee members were highly lucrative. The course, not every deal was a legitimate transaction. Garcia Report discussed how an official connected Instead, some were much more lucrative than the to Qatar 2022 provided millions of dollars to the executive committee members’ clubs could have daughter of the president of the Brazilian Football obtained under normal circumstances. One official Confederation. Qatar 2022 also promised to provide stated that he viewed the arrangement of a friendly $1 million to sponsor an event that the son of an match as a “quid pro quo” for the member’s vote. executive committee member was hosting. Qatar Not only could these matches be windfalls for the 2022 ultimately withdrew its support for the project members’ countries, but individuals who were close after receiving advice from counsel. to the members also received commissions for setting up these matches. Reprinted with permission © 2017 Personal Benefits The lack of cooperation was not limited to the sitting Bidding countries often paid for the travel of executive executive committee members. One former member committee members and their families. The payments initially ignored investigator’s requests. The former could be astounding. For example, one country paid member then had another person act as a liaison $5,500 a night for an executive committee member’s to the investigative body and demanded that all hotel room. This was in addition to providing the questions be addressed to both the liaison and the executive committee member with a dedicated driver official so they could jointly respond. This odd request and other services. In contrast, soccer’s biggest stars, was even more unusual because the proposed liaison including Lionel Messi, stayed in rooms that were less was also a subject of the investigation. The former than $300 a night. member then made public declarations in which he said that he had no intention of cooperating, Not every benefit was monetary. For example, overstated the number of questions posed to him England was asked to bestow an honorary knighthood in writing and falsely claimed investigators only on one South American soccer official. submitted questions in English and not in his native language. After FIFA levied a provisional ban for his All told, the Garcia Report concluded that there were lack of cooperation, the former official submitted prima facie cases of ethical violations by 12 then- written answers to questions. This shows that the current or former executive committee members. provisional ban was somewhat effective, in that the To put this number in perspective, FIFA only has 22 former member did answer some questions. But the provisional ban was not forceful enough, because executive committee members sitting at a time. the former member still refused to answer other Executive Committee Members’ questions, such as how he voted to award the 2018 and 2022 World Cups.