UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body UNION DES ASSOCIATIONS EUROPÉENNES DE FOOTBALL (UEFA) (Claimant) v. KF SKËNDERBEU (Respondent) ETHICS AND DISCIPLINARY INSPECTOR REPORT Ethics and Disciplinary Inspector Report UEFA v. KF Skënderbeu Contents I. THE PARTIES ......................................................................................................... 5 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ........................................................................................ 5 A. The UEFA and CAS Admissions Criteria Proceedings ................................................... 5 B. The FAA Proceedings .............................................................................................. 6 C. Investigation carried out by the UEFA Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors ...................... 7 III. APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS ................................................................... 7 IV. INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE. WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT? ................................ 8 V. SKENDERBEU’S INVOLVEMENT IN MATCH-FIXING ACTIVITIES .......................... 10 PART I – THE FIXED MATCHES ..................................................................................... 10 A. The BFDS Reports................................................................................................. 10 (i) The UEFA Betting Fraud Detection System ........................................... 10 a) Introduction ................................................................................................ 10 b) Expert Analysis on the BFDS by Prof. David Forrest ......................................... 11 c) Past Success of the BFDS as a means of detecting match-fixing ....................... 18 d) CAS approach on the BFDS ........................................................................... 21 (ii) An analysis on KS Skënderbeu ............................................................. 23 a) UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League 15/16 ............................... 25 i) Introduction ................................................................................. 25 ii) Crusaders FC vs. Skenderbeu (UCL, 21/06/2015) ........................ 25 iii) NK Dinamo Zagreb vs. Skënderbeu (UCL, 25/08/2015) ............... 27 iv) Sporting Clube de Portugal vs. Skënderbeu (UEL, 22/10/2015) .. 29 v) Skënderbeu vs. FC Lokomotiv Moskva (UEL, 10/12/2015) ........... 30 b) Earlier UEFA European matches .................................................................... 32 c) Domestic League and Cup matches at Albanian Superleague (2010-2015) ........ 33 d) Friendly matches ......................................................................................... 39 B. Further Evaluation of the UEFA Betting Fraud Detection System ................................ 40 (i) Additional expert analysis and evaluations of the BFDS ...................... 40 (ii) Explanation as to why no Skënderbeu matches have been escalated since mid-2016 ............................................................................................. 43 C. Technical Appreciation of the Performance of Skënderbeu Players in UEFA club competition matches ............................................................................................. 45 2 Ethics and Disciplinary Inspector Report UEFA v. KF Skënderbeu D. Match-fixing was confirmed by Skënderbeu representatives in front of CAS ................ 51 PART II – THE FIXED MATCHES BY PERSONS CONNECTED TO SKENDERBEU ...... 52 A. Matches were fixed by Skënderbeu ......................................................................... 52 B. There cannot be a fixed match without the involvement of people within the club ....... 52 C. UEFA’s supplementary investigations on KS Skënderbeu ........................................... 54 (i) Background of recent Skënderbeu history ........................................... 55 (ii) Suspected individuals involved in Skënderbeu’s manipulation of matches ....................................................................................................... 55 a) Introduction ................................................................................................ 55 b) Ridvan Bode (financial backer) ...................................................................... 56 c) Current and former Skënderbeu presidents: Ardjan Takaj and Agim Zeqo ......... 57 d) Connection between Ardjan Takaj and former Skënderbeu coach Mirel Josa ...... 59 e) Connection between Ardan Takaj and Skënderbeu players ............................... 60 f) Connection between Ardjan Takaj and betting companies ................................ 62 i) EuroBest Sh.a ............................................................................... 62 ii) Star Bet ........................................................................................ 63 iii) Top-Bast ....................................................................................... 64 iv) SBObet ......................................................................................... 65 v) Baste-Live .................................................................................... 66 vi) Super Bast .................................................................................... 69 D. The National and International Perception on KS Skënderbeu ................................... 70 (i) Opponent players: ............................................................................... 70 (ii) Supporters: .......................................................................................... 71 (iii) Betting operators: ................................................................................ 72 (iv) Media: .................................................................................................. 73 VI. LEGAL EVALUATION OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED FACTS ..................................... 74 A. Burden of proof .................................................................................................... 74 B. Standard of proof ................................................................................................. 75 C. The Case for Disciplinary Measures ......................................................................... 76 D. The principle of strict liability ................................................................................. 78 E. Evaluation of the facts and evidence ....................................................................... 81 VII. MEASURES TO BE IMPOSED ON KS SKËNDERBEU ............................................... 83 VIII. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 85 3 Ethics and Disciplinary Inspector Report UEFA v. KF Skënderbeu IX. EVIDENTIARY REQUEST ...................................................................................... 87 X. REQUEST FOR RELIEF .......................................................................................... 88 4 Ethics and Disciplinary Inspector Report UEFA v. KF Skënderbeu I. THE PARTIES 1. The claimant in these proceedings is the Union des Associations Européennes de Football (“UEFA”), the governing body of European football. The Claimant is represented in these proceedings by two UEFA Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors, pursuant to Article 34bis of the UEFA Statutes and Article 31.2 of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations (the “DR”). 2. The respondent in these proceedings is KF Skënderbeu (“Skënderbeu”), an affiliated member of the Football Association of Albania (the “FAA”). II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. The UEFA and CAS Admissions Criteria Proceedings 3. On 13 May 2016, following an investigation initiated on the basis of UEFA Betting Fraud Detection System (the “BFDS”) reports of irregular betting on Skënderbeu matches at both national and international level and the completion by this club of its Admissions Criteria Form for the 2016/2017 UEFA Champions League (the “16/17 UCL”), the UEFA Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors submitted a detailed and comprehensive report requesting that Skënderbeu be declared ineligible to participate in the 16/17 UCL. This request was made pursuant to Art. 4.02 UCL Regulations (the “UCLR”) without prejudice to seeking further disciplinary measures at a later stage in accordance with Art. 4.03 UCLR. 4. On 1 June 2016, the UEFA Appeals Body found to its comfortable satisfaction that Skënderbeu had been in breach of Art. 4.02 UCLR and decided to declare the club ineligible to play the 16/17 UCL. 5. On 6 July 2016, and following an appeal lodged by Skënderbeu with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), a CAS arbitral tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal and to confirm the UEFA Appeals Body’s decision. The grounds of such decision (CAS 2016/A/4650) were notified to the parties on 21 November 2016. 6. In its award in case CAS 2016/A/4650, the Panel confirmed the validity of the two-step process conducted by UEFA in relation to match-fixing, consisting first in a possible exclusion from participation in European competitions for one season and, second in a possible disciplinary sanction which may involve a suspension from participating in European competitions for multiple seasons.1 7. The Panel also acknowledged the CAS jurisprudence endorsing disciplinary proceedings being carried out separately and subsequently from the initial administrative measure of ineligibility from UEFA competitions: 1 CAS 2016/A/4650 Klubi Sportiv Skënderbeu v. UEFA, paras. 47 et seqq. 5 Ethics and Disciplinary Inspector