The long-standing power struggle between FIFA and UEFA has worsened this week as FIFA accused UEFA of pursuing a “smear campaign” in the world football’s governing body over an abandoned effort to bring outside investors to the World Cup. FIFA has said UEFA has not only been accused of a ‘smear campaign’ against FIFA but also that the U.S. legal action could even move on from FIFA to pursue legal action against FIFA leadership.
FIFA had unveiled the controversial investment proposal in July, but the plan met strong resistance from several football stakeholders. The proposal involved selling ownership of the World Cup to investors, raising questions of transparency, governance and the potential for private capital to have a seat at the table of the world’s most prestigious football tournament. FIFA eventually abandoned the plan in the face of the growing backlash.
UEFA has been the most vocal opponent of the proposal. The organisation has since taken steps in three US states to obtain documents from FIFA and various parties linked to the investment plan. One such organisation is Thrive Capital, a private investment firm headed up by Joshua Kushner, who was said to be one of a potential lead investor in the proposed deal.
According to filings cited by AFP, FIFA has asked US judges for permission to challenge UEFA’s request for documents. FIFA described UEFA’s legal action as a “smear campaign” against FIFA and its leadership. UEFA is also accused of what it called a “fishing expedition,” the report said.
The dispute could have far-reaching implications beyond the abandoned investment proposal. UEFA has said if it obtains the requested documents, it could use that to lodge a legal complaint in Switzerland. UEFA said it has received assurances that such a complaint would be accepted by a Swiss court.
UEFA has also been considering whether legal action could be taken against FIFA president Gianni Infantino for “criminal mismanagement.” FIFA has denied the claims and said UEFA has no legal means to demand access to its own internal records because no criminal proceedings have been initiated in Switzerland or elsewhere.
FIFA has also questioned UEFA’s legal standing, arguing the European governing body has not suffered financial losses as a result of the proposed investment plan. FIFA also accused UEFA of attempting to use US courts to obtain information that should be pursued through the Swiss legal system.
The organisation has strongly resisted the release of sensitive documents, particularly correspondence between Infantino, FIFA officials, staff members and advisers. FIFA argued that releasing such material would harm its interests and expose sensitive and proprietary information.
But the spat comes at a politically important time for Infantino. The FIFA president has been seeking a fourth and final term in office and had anticipated re-election in March and was hoping to win without opposition. FIFA has pointed to the success of the upcoming World Cup as evidence of continuity in Infantino's rule.
UEFA is one of his strongest critics. The European governing body has previously described the World Cup investment plan as a “shady, opaque backroom deal” because of its opposition to it.
UEFA has also been supported by other major football confederations. FIFA’s leadership and governance is not good, UEFA has said. CONCACAF, which oversees football in North America, Central America and the Caribbean, and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) are concerned about FIFA.
CONCACAF president Victor Montagliani is perceived as a potential rival for Infantino in the FIFA presidential race. UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin, however, has ruled himself out of the race.
The three confederations have in the past raised pressure on FIFA in a strongly worded joint letter. Football’s leadership in general should be in the best interests of the sport and not concentrated on individuals, they said. UEFA also called for FIFA to be made to work again as an institution focused on football.
FIFA has refused to address the criticisms of Infantino and its leadership. The investment proposal has been abandoned but the legal and political problems are still present and this is a matter of balance between FIFA and continental confederations. If the US document requests are resolved and any future proceedings in Switzerland take place, then the debate around transparency, governance and leadership in football will also play a bigger role.
For now, the abandoned World Cup investment plan has become a much bigger conflict; FIFA and UEFA are in a dispute that could go beyond the original financial proposal.
