The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled on September 16, 2016, in the case between Michel Platini and FIFA, addressing violations of FIFA's Code of Ethics (CEF). The case centered on allegations that Platini, a former FIFA Vice-President and UEFA President, received an undue advantage in the form of a CHF 2 million payment in 2011, which FIFA deemed unjustified. The tribunal examined several legal issues, including the definition of "third parties" under the CEF, the burden and standard of proof, conflicts of interest, and the proportionality of sanctions. The tribunal clarified that the term "third parties" applies broadly to any individual, whether inside or outside FIFA, who provides or receives an undue benefit. FIFA bore the burden of proving Platini's violation by demonstrating the lack of a legitimate basis for the payment, with the standard of proof being "intimate conviction," stricter than civil standards but less stringent than criminal ones.
The tribunal found no evidence supporting an oral agreement justifying the payment, deeming it an undue advantage under Article 20 CEF. Platini was also found to have a conflict of interest under Article 19 CEF due to his role in FIFA's finance committee while concealing the payment. The tribunal applied the principle of lex specialis derogat generali, meaning specific rules override general ones, and dismissed broader ethical violations in favor of the more precise Articles 19 and 20 CEF. It ruled that FIFA's president could not validly represent the organization in transactions involving exorbitant payments or undue advantages, as such acts exceeded his authority. The tribunal considered mitigating factors, such as Platini's contributions to football and lack of prior offenses, but also aggravating factors, including his high-ranking position and lack of remorse.
The CAS partially upheld Platini's appeal, reducing his initial six-year ban to four years and the fine from CHF 80,000 to CHF 60,000. The decision emphasized the gravity of the violations but acknowledged mitigating circumstances. The ban, effective from October 8, 2015, covered all football-related activities at national and international levels. The CAS rejected Platini's argument that the sanctions violated his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and Swiss law, stating the restrictions were necessary to uphold public and private interests. The ruling underscored the importance of ethical conduct in football governance and the consequences of violating FIFA's regulations. The case highlighted the challenges of proving oral agreements in legal disputes and reinforced the need for transparency and accountability in sports administration. The CAS's decision was final and binding, concluding the matter with no further action required.