The case involves FK Pobeda, its president Aleksandar Zabrcanec, and former captain Nikolce Zdraveski appealing against UEFA's decision regarding alleged match-fixing during the 2004/2005 UEFA Champions League qualifying matches against FC Pyunik. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel addressed key legal and procedural issues, ruling that anonymous witness statements could be admissible under strict conditions, such as cross-examination and verification of the witness's identity and reputation, despite potential impacts on the right to a fair hearing under the European Convention on Human Rights and Swiss Constitution. The case underscored that match-fixing, though not explicitly mentioned in UEFA's regulations, violates fundamental principles of loyalty, integrity, and sportsmanship by undermining fair competition. UEFA bore the burden of proof, needing to establish facts to the "comfortable satisfaction" of the court, given the seriousness of the allegations.
The allegations stemmed from unusual betting patterns in the first match, with expert analysis indicating suspicious activity, though insufficient data limited conclusions about the second match. UEFA charged the appellants based on these findings and anonymous witness testimonies. The CAS emphasized the necessity of strong sanctions against clubs to deter match-fixing, signaling severe consequences for entire organizations, not just individuals. The panel upheld UEFA's decision, reinforcing the importance of combating corruption in sports and affirming regulatory bodies' role in preserving competition integrity.
The appellants challenged UEFA's initial sanctions, which included an eight-year ban for Pobeda and lifetime bans for Zabrcanec and Zdraveski, arguing procedural unfairness due to limited access to evidence and inability to cross-examine witnesses directly. UEFA defended its stance, citing witness protection needs due to intimidation risks, supported by legal precedents. The CAS proceedings involved disputes over evidence admission, including audio recordings and additional witnesses, with the panel balancing witness safety against the appellants' right to a fair hearing. The hearing took place in December 2009, with arrangements for protected witnesses and translation services.
The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction based on UEFA's statutes and applicable laws, including the 2004 UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and Swiss law. The panel concluded that the matches were manipulated, relying on betting pattern analysis, financial difficulties at Pobeda, and credible witness testimonies. Zabrcanec was found directly involved, with his behavior and statements indicating intent to manipulate outcomes, leading to the upholding of his lifetime ban. However, the panel found insufficient evidence against Zdraveski, annulling his sanction. The eight-year ban on Pobeda was upheld, as the club failed to oppose Zabrcanec's actions, though it could still compete domestically.
The final ruling, issued on 15 April 2010, rejected the appeals of Pobeda and Zabrcanec but admitted Zdraveski's appeal, overturning his sanction. The decision highlighted the severe consequences of match-fixing and the importance of credible evidence in disciplinary proceedings, underscoring the need for stringent yet fair processes to maintain football's integrity.