BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION ARE THE WORST
ENEMIES OF SPORTS.
(PARTICULAR ATTENTION GIVEN TO THE MALTESE SCENARIO)
SANDRO ZAMMIT FELICE
PBL2021 SPORTS LAW
LL.B (HONS)
UNIVERSITY OF MALTA
DECEMBER 2018
DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP FOR ASSIGNMENTS
I, Sandro Zammit Felice, declare that this assignment PBL2021 – SPORTS LAW and the work presented
is/are my own personal work. I confirm that:
•
The Word Count of the assignment is 2171 words.
•
This work was done in partial fulfilment for the master/degree/diploma/certificate in
LL.B (Hons) at the Faculty of Laws of the University of Malta.
•
Where any part of this assignment has previously been submitted for a degree or any other
qualifications at this University or any other institution, this has been clearly stated.
•
Where I have consulted the published work of others, this is always clearly attributed.
•
Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is always given. With the exception
of such quotations, this assignment is entirely my own work.
•
I have acknowledged all sources used for the purpose of this work.
•
I have not commissioned this work, whether in whole or in part, to a third party and that this
work is my own work.
•
I have read the University of Malta’s guidelines on plagiarism
Signed: _____________________________
Date: 01.01.2019
II
ABSTRACT
Considering the vastness of the subject, the author focusses on the law and its pursuit to fight
corruption and bribery in sports.
In order to point out the distinction between powers conferred to the police, emanating from
the law and those arising from statutes of other entities, the author briefly explains their
divergence.
Although it would have been ideal to make reference to a number of judgements, due to the
limited word count, the author focuses on the Kevin Sammut case, pointing out its origin, the
involvement of the German prosecutors, the UEFA and MFA, the process and the eventual
sanctions.
III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION OF AUTORSHIP................................................................................... II
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................III
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. IV
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
DOMESTIC LAWS AND REGULATIONS ......................................................................1
Laws Fighting Bribery and Corruption ..............................................1
Statutes of Other Bodies ....................................................................3
Ordinary Justice vs Sports Justice......................................................3
THE KEVIN SAMMUT CASE...........................................................................................5
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................6
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................8
IV
INTRODUCTION
Sport can be defined as an activity, requiring skills and physical exertion, which is done
according to regulations in pursuit of enjoyment and/or competition, or even as a job. What
makes sports thrilling is the development of the game, and most of all the unknowing outcome
and result of such game. Corruption and bribery in their various forms, deprive sports of what
is arguably its greatest pleasure, that of unpredictability.
In order to define the concept of corruption one would find it to be a difficult task in every
context and sports is no exception. It is definitely not a new phenomenon, and literature speaks
of corruption in Olympic Games, spanning back thousands of years. As a matter of fact the
earliest archived case goes back to the Olympic Games of 388 B.C, where three athletes,
competing in a combat tournament are documented to have been successfully bribed by
Eupolos of Thessalia, their competitor.1
Domestic Laws and Regulations
Laws Fighting Bribery and Corruption
The first legislation to penalise corrupt practices in in sports was Act XIX of 1976. This was
subsequently amended by Acts XIII of 1983 and XXIV of 2001, and Legal Notice 423 of
2007.2 Article 3 of the same act defines corrupt practice in detail and is trisected in order to
make a distinction between the player, any official or organiser and any other person. The
law speaks of prohibition in accepting or attempting to accept, giving or offering a gift for the
act or omission in relation to a game or sport the individual is involved. On conviction,
penalties emanating from Chapter 263 vary from fines (multa) to up to two years
imprisonment.3
1
Wolfgang Maennig, ‘Corruption in international sports and how it may be combated.’ (2008) IASE.
2
Chapter 263 (Prevention of Corruption (Players) Act) of the Laws of Malta.
3
Article 3 of Chapter 263 of the Laws of Malta.
1
On the 31st of July 2018, in order to reflect the present realities in sports, including but not
limited to online betting, the Prevention of Corruption in Sport Act4 was enacted. Dr. Bonett
who is a senior consultant to the Parliamentary Secretary for Youth, Sport and Voluntary
Organisations, revealed in an online portal that what catalysed the eventual legislation, was a
newsletter issued by the integrity officer, alleging the possibility of corruption in local clubs.
This, he adds, prompted the creation of a task force made up of a number of entities, including
members from the MFA (Malta Football Association), the Government, the Opposition,
SportMalta, the Malta Police Force, the MGA (Malta Gaming Authority) and during the
drafting stage of the Bill, the Attorney General.5
Of a pertinent matter is the establishment of a body corporate known as the Sports Integrity
Unit which emerges from this law. This entity, which is recognized as a legal person, has a
paramount role in preventing and confronting the manipulation of sports. Article 10 of the
Act6 delineates the functions of this unit, which include,
i.
The compilation and analysis of information relevant to investigations or suspicion of
malpractice in sports events.
ii.
Coordination in the fight against corrupt practice in sports.
iii.
Scrutiny of alerts coming from betting systems.
iv.
Acting as reference point to the police and other sport authorities in issues relating to
the manipulation of sports.
v.
Being forefront in advising the minister of relating polices and liaising with the
Education Department on educational programmes.
vi.
Advising the Minister on the update of laws related to sports integrity.
vii.
Collaboration with the police and other investigative bodies.
viii.
Representing the government of Malta in regional and international domains with
regard to manipulation of sports.
4
Chapter 593 of the Laws of Malta.
5
Rebekah Cilia, '‘We Know Match-Fixing Happens But No One Has Ever Approached Me’ – Chris Bonett -
The Malta Independent' (Independent.com.mt, 2018) <http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-0730/local-news/We-know-match-fixing-happens-but-no-one-has-ever-approached-me-Chris-Bonett6736194159> accessed 10 December 2018.
6
ibid (n 5).
2
Statutes of other Bodies
In the Maltese Olympic Committee’s statute one may observe that as part of its undertakings,
is the adherence and compliance with the regulations of the International Olympic Committee
mission and role of which includes ‘to protect clean athletes and the integrity of sport, by
leading the fight against doping, and by taking action against all forms of manipulation of
competitions and related corruption;’.7 However the statute fails to mention directly and
explicitly manipulation or corruption with regard to the game.
Contrastingly, the MFA which has a vastly detailed statute is conspicuous about the subject.
As a matter of fact in section I of the statute under Miscellaneous Matters 154(v) one finds that,
‘The Association has the power to investigate any matter relating
to corruption and to take all measures to prevent corruption and to
punish anybody found guilty of corrupt practices.’ 8
Article 154(vi) empowers the council of the association to decide which rules, bye-laws and
regulations apply in such investigations, whereas article 154(vii) defines corruption as that
stipulated in Chapter 263 of the Laws of Malta.9 Section IX of the statute book, on the other
hand, outlines the disciplinary procedures and sanctions in relation to various kinds of
misconduct, including that of bribery.10
Ordinary Justice vs Sports Justice
Of paramount importance is the distinction between ordinary justice and sports justice.
Whereas on one side an association such as the MFA has its own statute, disciplinary and
adjudicating bodies, the ordinary justice is regulated by the pertinent laws of Malta, including
7
Chapter 1, Article 2(8) of the Olympic Charter.
8
Section I of the MFA Statute Book, <http://www.mfa.com.mt/en/the-mfa/themfa/8/statute-and-
regulations.htm> accessed 15 January 2019.
9
ibid.
10
Section IX of the MFA Statute Book, <http://www.mfa.com.mt/en/the-mfa/themfa/8/statute-andregulations.htm> accessed 15 January 2019.
3
but not limited to the aforementioned legislations, all of which are adjudicated by the courts
of justice.
Both are autonomous in the aspect of investigation, while the MFA can initiate an
investigation on suspect of illicit behaviour, the police have the power to proceed ex-officio
in terms of both Chapter 263 and 593 of the laws of Malta. This is due to the fact that in both
legislations there is no reference to the need of complaints in order for the police to initiate
investigations. In fact, as Grima11 maintains, although the offences are similar in their nature,
as those arising from article 293 of the criminal code (CC)12 which relate to fraud, the latter
require the complaint of the injured party for the commencement of a criminal investigation.
Suffice it to say that when such offence is committed in the context of profession, trade or
business, proceedings are instituted ex-officio, as clearly outlined in article 294 of the CC13,
which in my view is more relatable to offences committed under chapters 263 and 593 of the
Laws of Malta. My reasoning emanates from the fact that sports is by all means considered a
multi-billionaire industry14, and therefore the term business in sports is an understatement.
A privilege reaped by the police is the arrest of the individual and seizing of the objects ought
to be useful for investigation and eventually prosecution. Investigative bodies, such as those
stemming from the MFA do not enjoy these prerogatives.
As regard to sanctions while the MFA statute and the Laws of Malta can impose fines, the
former may also suspend and censure, whereas under the provisions of the latter, on
conviction one may also be imprisoned.
11
Clifton Grima, ‘Aspects Regarding the Future Regulation of Maltese Football.’ (LL.D. University of Malta
2010).
12
Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta.
13
Ibid.
14
Hervé Collignon, Nicolas Sultan, Clément Santander, ‘The Sports Market, Major Trends and Challenges in an
Industry Full of Passion.) (2011).
4
THE KEVIN SAMMUT CASE
A criminal investigation by the organised crime task force in Bochum (Germany), with the aim
to look into drugs and prostitution, took an unexpected turn when a chain of rigged football
matches of an international scale were discovered. Hundreds of matches, both national and
international were believed to be fixed by a network of corruption exposed by means of the
investigation. Among these matches the investigators revealed that during a number of
interviews conducted, members of an international criminal gang Marijo Cvrtak and Ante
Sapina, had disclosed that they had rigged or attempted to rig, the UEFA EURO 2008
qualifying match between Norway and Malta, which took place in Oslo, 2006.15
Mr. Cvrtak gave account on how he had scheduled to a meet a Maltese player who would
eventually assure him of compliance with his plan. The meeting took place in a hotel where
the Maltese contingency was being accommodated. The agreement reached was that Malta
would lose to Norway 4 – 0. Mr. Cvrtak gave testimony, how on the same day, coincidentally,
he met the player again at the hotel, who was in the company of other players. Mr. Cvrtak adds
how he was given the impression that the other players were also aware and participating in
the scheme previously agreed. The game ended 4-0 for Norway, and of the €340,000 won by
the schemers, €70,000 were to be given to the Maltese players.
Investigation by the local police began in June 2011, and by early 2012 Mr. Sammut, his family
members and a number of individuals from the Maltese contingent were interrogated.
Following his arrest and detainment for forty eight hours, Mr. Sammut was released, due to
lack of evidence.
The MFA started its own investigation based on evidence and information given by the Maltese
and German authorities, yet in early 2012 UEFA informed the MFA that it was assuming
jurisdiction for disciplinary proceedings.16
The UEFA Control and Disciplinary Body (CDB) ruled that Kevin Sammut, Kenneth Scicluna
and Stephen Wellman, all three playing for the National Team at the time, were implicated in
15
Kevin Sammut v UEFA, 28 May 2014, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Ref. CAS 2013/A/3062
16
ibid.
5
the match-fixing. Consequently the CDB was requested to penalize the players by suspending
them for a period, to be decided by the same body.
Kevin Sammut was suspended for a period of ten years from all football related activities after
being found guilty of breaching Article 11(2)(a) of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations, which
suspension was requested to be extended by FIFA. Stephen Wellman and Kenneth Scicluna
were exonerated due to lack of evidence.
Both Mr. Sammut and the UEFA appealed the decision, and whilst the former was asking for
a more lenient punishment, the latter were requesting a life-time ban. The Appeals body ruled
that in no instance were Mr. Sammut’s rights violated and his involvement in the match-fixing
were sufficiently proven, and by such it was rejecting Sammut’s request and upholding that of
the UEFA, and requesting it to be extended by FIFA.
An appeal by Mr. Sammut before the Court of Arbitration for Sport was partially upheld and
the suspension was decreased back to ten years, to be initiated retroactively from the first ruling
handed by the CDB.
Conclusion
By no coincidence that Rogge, the president of the International Olympic Committee
maintained that the issue of match-fixing poses a greater threat than the issue of doping, in
sports. Essentially, this is because doping generally affects that one individual, whereas the
consequences of match-fixing encumber the whole competition.17
In a judgement delivered in July 2017, Ronnie Mackay, a recidivist, who had already been
imprisoned for match-fixing related offences, was sentenced to two years in prison for the
conspiracy and bribery of players forming part of the under-21 National Team. In a hefty
judgement, the court, presided by Magistrate Joe Mifsud, on handing the judgement made
reference to a number of statements made by supranational authorities, one of which was made
by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime,
17
Kevin Carpenter, 'Match-Fixing—The Biggest Threat to Sport in the 21st Century? ' (2012) 2 ISLR 13.
6
‘There is growing evidence that sport is corrupted by matchfixing
and illegal betting. These illegal activities jeopardise the integrity
of the competitions, damage the social, educational and cultural
values reflected by sports, and threaten the economic role of
sports..’.18
What in my view is a strong statement was that made in the case against Alex Azzopardi, which
sentence was confirmed on appeal. On that occasion the court maintained that a clear message
has to be sent to whoever intends to take up such adventures (referring to match-fixing), that
no remorse will be expressed and on conviction, the severity of the law shall apply.19
The above highlights the importance of enacting suitable laws in the field, but likewise
important, the update and tweaking of such laws in order to reflect the dynamic realities
evolving in sports.
Furthermore, collaboration between different states, both in the enactment of laws and
investigation, is according to my view paramount in furtherance of prevention and possible
disciplinary actions, which serve as a deterrent against those few individuals who aspire to
manipulate, what arguably gives the most joy to every community around the world.
18
Il-Pulizija vs. Ronnie Mackay, Court of Magistrates (Criminal Judicature), Decided per Magistrate Joe Mifsud
(21 July 2017).
19
Il-Pulizija vs. Alex Azzopardi, Court Criminal Appeal, Decided per Mr. Justice Victor Caruana Colombo (24
April 1995)
7
Bibliography
Legislation
Criminal Code, Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta
Chapter 263, Prevention of Corruption (Players) Act
Chapter 593 Prevention of Corruption in Sport Act
Section I and IX of the MFA Statute book
Judgements and Decisions
Kevin Sammut v UEFA, 28 May 2014, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Ref. CAS 2013/A/3062
Il-Pulizija vs. Ronnie Mackay, Court of Magistrates (Criminal Judicature), Decided per
Magistrate Joe Mifsud (21 July 2017)
Il-Pulizija vs. Alex Azzopardi, Court Criminal Appeal, Decided per Mr. Justice Victor Caruana
Colombo (24 April 1995)
Dissertations
Buhagiar A, 'A Legal Analysis of the Current European Situation Regarding Corrupt Practices
in Football With Particular Attention Given to the Maltese Scenario.’ (LL.D. University of
Malta 2014)
Grima C, ‘Aspects Regarding the Future Regulation of Maltese Football.’ (LL.D. University
of Malta 2010)
Websites
Cilia R, '‘We Know Match-Fixing Happens But No One Has Ever Approached Me’ – Chris
Bonett
The
Malta
Independent'
(Independent.com.mt,
2018)
<http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-07-30/local-news/We-know-match-fixinghappens-but-no-one-has-ever-approached-me-Chris-Bonett-6736194159>
accessed
10
December 2018
Kelso P, 'How German Police Fell On European Football's Biggest Match-Fixing Scandal By
Accident'
(Telegraph.co.uk,
2013)
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/news/9851507/How-German-police-fell-onEuropean-footballs-biggest-match-fixing-scandal-by-accident.html> accessed 10 December
2018
8
'Olympic
Charter'
(Stillmed.olympic.org,
2015)
<https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf> accessed 10 December
2018
Journals
Carpenter K, 'Match-Fixing—The Biggest Threat to Sport in the 21st Century? ' (2012) 2 ISLR
Tak M, Sam M P, Jackson S J, ‘The problems and causes of match-fixing: are legal sports
betting regimes to blame?’ (2018) 4 CRPP
Maennig W, ‘Corruption in international sports and how it may be combated.’ (2008) IASE
Collignon H, Sultan N, Santander C, ‘The Sports Market, Major Trends and Challenges in an
Industry Full of Passion.) (2011)
9