The case of Vernon Manilal Fernando v. FIFA, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on 30 March 2015, involved serious allegations of bribery and breaches of the FIFA Code of Ethics (FCE) related to the 2009 Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Congress election for a seat on the FIFA Executive Committee. Fernando, a former member of the AFC and FIFA executive committees, was accused of offering bribes to influence the election outcome, including a $20,000 cash gift to an Indian football official. The CAS panel, composed of Prof. Luigi Fumagalli, The Hon. Michael Beloff QC, and Prof. Ulrich Haas, addressed key legal and procedural issues, including the retroactive application of the FCE, the burden of proof, and the interpretation of bribery under Article 12 of the FCE. The panel ruled that bribery includes transactions between FIFA officials, not just external parties, and emphasized that the timing of the bribery agreement, not the payment, is decisive.
The panel found compelling evidence of bribery in Fernando's emails, which suggested he facilitated payments to secure votes. Fernando claimed the $20,000 was a personal wedding gift, but the panel rejected this, noting the email's clear request for reimbursement and the lack of credible justification for the payment. The panel also dismissed Fernando's defense that an email instructing delegates to photograph their ballots was merely a "puff" to reassure a candidate, finding his explanations unconvincing. The panel upheld FIFA's decision to impose a life ban on Fernando, stressing that bribery warrants the severest sanctions to preserve football's integrity.
The case also highlighted procedural matters, such as the principle of secret voting and the privilege against self-incrimination. The panel affirmed that while delegates may disclose their votes afterward, the secrecy mechanism protects their freedom from undue influence. It also cautioned against treating failure to cooperate (to avoid self-incrimination) as a separate offense, as this could amount to double counting.
Fernando's appeal to CAS sought annulment of FIFA's decision, acquittal on certain charges, or a reduced sanction. FIFA, however, maintained that Fernando's actions warranted a lifetime ban, citing the gravity of his breaches. The panel ultimately dismissed Fernando's appeal, confirming the life ban based on the totality of evidence, including his emails and the circumstantial context. The ruling reinforced FIFA's stringent ethical standards and the severe consequences for violations, underscoring the importance of transparency and integrity in football governance. The case serves as a stark reminder of the zero-tolerance approach to corruption in sports.