FIFA hopes that all parties will agree to their transfer regulations to the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the Lass Diarra case and have “some guideline” by mid-November, which “works to protect the interests of everyone.”
This was announced by its Director of Legal Affairs, Emilio García Silvero, at a conference organized by the Association of Spanish Footballers (AFE) on the effects of the ruling, which considered some points of the regulations to be contrary to European law because they hinder free movement and They restrict competition between clubs.
“We intend to put something on the table provisionally in winter in Europe and in summer in Latin America. When November 15 ends, we would like some specific non-permanent article 17 guidelines. And then the idea is that we can begin the next window of important aspects with 17.2 and 17.4 adapted to the court’s requirements and agreed upon between the parties,” he stated.
García Silvero highlighted the work that FIFA does to protect footballers and assured that “it has never violated the rights of workers regardless of their contractual situation with another club.”
“Who protects the Argentine soccer player who is going to play in Japan, Gabon or Saudi Arabia and who has defaults? Only FIFA protects him. “I don’t know of any other international sector in the world of work where workers have the guarantees they have through FIFA’s sanctioning systems for breach of contracts,” he said.
In his opinion, the ruling admits that footballers are not free to unilaterally break the contract with their club without giving compensation and the dispute focuses on what the financial consequences of this would be, which is why he has started a dialogue with the interested parties. to adapt article 17 of its regulations.
He also recalled that “these rules were not unilaterally imposed” and referred to the agreements not mentioned by the CJEU reached in 2001 between the European Commission, FIFA and UEFA on this matter, which are the basis of the content of said article.
“We must implement a new configuration regarding the calculation of the unilateral interruption of work. In Spain, the club that hires a player who has unilaterally broken the contract within a period of one year is responsible for the compensation ordered by the judge. Sometimes this sentence can put many footballers at risk. Right now the calculation of compensation is up in the air because before there were criteria and now there are none,” he added.
You might be interested in: FIFA and the UN renew their training program to combat match-fixing
FIFA hopes to have agreements on its transfer regulations by mid-November
The specialist in sports, international and community law Juan de Dios Crespo believes that the CJEU ruling is not going to provoke a revolution, but rather a “normalization”, because Diarra alleged that he had been prevented from working because the clubs that wanted to sign him were afraid of the demand for payment.
“This is what we lawyers are asking for, which has to be the other way around and condemn the club if it has induced the player to break the contract. The ball is in FIFA. “The regulations have to be modified and be a little more proportional where there are large amounts to pay, because if there is no club behind it it is very difficult for the player to pay,” he said.
He also believes that transfers will have to be adjusted a little because the teams “will not have the feeling of protection like when if someone breaks the contract they would pay him a part of the transfer”, and the point of compensation must be addressed, regarding the that there are specific laws according to the legislation of the countries.
“The compensation parameters have to be objective. If you have left in the second year and have signed for five, then the three years are yours. Another objective fact would be to increase the figure by x amount. Therefore all cases are not the same, because it is not the same to break the contract in the first year, the second or the third,” he indicated.
The day also included a round table moderated by María José López, director of the AFE Legal Department, in which Álvaro Ortiz, president of the Mexican Football Players Association (AMFpro), Lucien W. Valloni, president of the Swiss players’ group, participated. (SAFP) and Rodrigo García, partner at Laffer Abogados.
Valloni stressed that all these changes had to have been made “ten years ago” and believed that the compensation that the club or the player should give in the event of unilateral termination would have to be agreed upon before, since “it is a problem for the most modest players.”
Rodrigo García denounced the “abusive, disproportionate and out-of-market clauses” that are established for the players, “who are unprotected” and rejected “normalizing that only the clubs have economic benefits.”
Finally, Álvaro Ortiz agreed with García in not understanding the protection of the clubs and remarked that “from Latin America they do not understand the circulars sent by FIFPRO “which claim it as a victory.”
With information from EFE.
Get inspired, discover and share. Follow us and find what you are looking for on our Instagram!
