The case of Irina Deriugina versus the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) revolves around allegations of bias and misconduct in her role as a member of the FIG's Rhythmic Gymnastics Technical Committee (CT GR) and as an international judge. Deriugina, who had been involved in rhythmic gymnastics since 1985, was accused of favoring Ukrainian gymnasts while deliberately under-scoring Russian competitors, particularly Olga Kapranova and Alina Kabaeva, during the 2007 European Championships and World Championships. She also faced accusations of spreading false rumors about the FIG and the European Gymnastics Union (UEG), damaging their reputations. An independent review by the FIG concluded that Deriugina had intentionally manipulated scores and violated her ethical obligations as a judge. Following a disciplinary hearing on March 29, 2008, which Deriugina did not attend, the FIG Disciplinary Commission imposed severe sanctions, including her suspension from all official FIG functions until the end of 2008, a ban on holding any FIG-related roles until 2016, and the revocation of her judging license.
Deriugina appealed the decision, submitting a detailed analysis arguing that Kabaeva’s scores at the 2007 World Championships were inflated. The FIG Appeal Tribunal partially upheld her appeal on July 1, 2008, reducing the sanctions to expire at the end of the 2009-2012 cycle but rejecting her other requests. The tribunal acknowledged her right to express opinions but found her persistent accusations against judges and officials inappropriate. Deriugina then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), requesting an expedited procedure and raising concerns about arbitrator impartiality. The CAS hearing proceeded on July 28, 2008, despite her request for a postponement due to witness unavailability.
The CAS upheld the FIG's decision, ruling that Deriugina’s intentional misconduct demonstrated her unfitness for judging-related roles. The tribunal found her actions breached the FIG's statutes and ethical obligations, justifying the sanctions. Key evidence included her manipulation of video footage to justify an unfairly low score for Kabaeva, which was deemed either incompetent or dishonest. The CAS also noted Deriugina’s conflict of interest as both a CT GR member and head coach of the Ukrainian national team, which compromised her impartiality. While the sanctions were upheld, the CAS clarified they should not extend to her participation in FIG events as a member of her national federation, as the conflict of interest no longer applied once she was suspended from the CT GR.
The case underscores the importance of impartiality and ethical conduct in sports judging, highlighting the consequences of violating these principles. It also demonstrates the role of the CAS in resolving disputes within international sports federations, ensuring fair adjudication while upholding the integrity of the sport. The final decision balanced accountability with proportionality, maintaining sanctions for Deriugina’s misconduct while allowing her to participate in FIG events in a non-official capacity.