The case of Amadou Diakite against FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), centered on allegations of corruption related to the bidding process for the FIFA World Cup. The controversy arose from secretly recorded conversations between Diakite and journalists posing as lobbyists for a fictitious company, Franklin Jones, who sought to influence the selection of the World Cup host nation. These recordings, obtained without Diakite's knowledge and later published by the Sunday Times, formed the basis of FIFA's disciplinary charges against him. The CAS panel, composed of Prof. Massimo Coccia, François Klein, and Michele Bernasconi, addressed key legal issues, including the admissibility of secretly recorded evidence, the scope of CAS's review powers, and the applicable rules of evidence under Swiss law.
The CAS affirmed its authority to conduct a full review of the case, independent of prior procedural defects, provided Diakite had a fair opportunity to present his defense. Under Swiss law, sports associations like FIFA are permitted to impose disciplinary rules on members, provided fundamental principles such as the right to be heard and proportionality are respected. The panel ruled that exposing corruption in major sporting events serves the public interest, citing European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence that undercover journalistic methods, while deceptive, are not inherently illegal. The panel concluded that evidence obtained unlawfully could still be admissible in arbitration unless it violated fundamental justice principles. In this case, the recordings were deemed admissible because the journalists acted in the public interest, and their use did not contravene Swiss public policy.
FIFA's disciplinary code allowed the panel to base its decision on its own conviction, with no restrictions on admissible evidence, including audio and video recordings. The standard of proof required was higher than civil law's balance of probabilities but lower than criminal law's beyond reasonable doubt. The panel acknowledged that the recordings infringed Diakite's privacy rights under Swiss law but determined that the public interest in combating corruption outweighed his privacy concerns. The recordings revealed Diakite's willingness to accept improper offers to influence the World Cup bidding process, constituting violations of FIFA's Ethics Code, including corruption (Article 11), failure to report misconduct (Article 14), and breaches of loyalty and confidentiality (Articles 3 and 9).
Diakite, a Malian football official and former FIFA executive committee member, was initially sanctioned by FIFA with a three-year ban and a CHF 10,000 fine. The FIFA Appeals Committee reduced this to a two-year ban and a CHF 7,500 fine, which the CAS upheld. The panel noted the sanctions were relatively lenient given the severity of the offenses but found them proportionate. Diakite's high-ranking positions within FIFA and the Confederation of African Football (CAF) aggravated his misconduct, as he failed to uphold the ethical standards expected of someone in his role. His failure to report the corruption attempts, despite his extensive experience, further demonstrated a breach of trust.
The CAS dismissed Diakite's appeal, affirming FIFA's decision and reinforcing the importance of integrity in football governance. The ruling underscored the admissibility of undercover evidence in disciplinary proceedings when justified by public interest, while balancing privacy rights against the need to combat corruption. The case highlighted the ethical challenges in sports governance and the consequences of failing to adhere to ethical standards, particularly in high-stakes events like the World Cup. The decision serves as a reminder of the zero-tolerance approach to corruption in sports and the necessity of accountability among officials to maintain public confidence in the fairness of sporting events.