The case involves Samir Arab, a Maltese professional football player, who appealed a UEFA decision imposing a two-year ban for failing to report match-fixing approaches. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed the case, which stemmed from allegations related to a 2016 match between the Maltese U-21 team and Montenegro U-21. The match-fixing plot was orchestrated by Ronnie Mackay and Seyble Zammit, with Arab accused of being approached but refusing the offers. UEFA's disciplinary bodies initially found Arab guilty of violating Article 12(2)(d) of its Disciplinary Regulations for failing to report the approaches, imposing a ban until December 31, 2019. Arab appealed, arguing the sanction was disproportionate and that his cooperation in testifying against the match-fixers should mitigate his punishment.
The CAS panel upheld UEFA's decision, emphasizing that while it has full review powers, it would only overturn sanctions if they were evidently disproportionate. The panel noted Arab's cooperation with Maltese authorities but found it insufficient to qualify as "substantial assistance," which requires full disclosure and active participation in investigations. The panel also addressed procedural issues, rejecting Arab's claim that the UEFA Appeals Body violated legal principles by reconsidering a dismissed charge. While the panel acknowledged the Appeals Body's reasoning was flawed, it concluded this did not warrant annulling the decision.
Arab defended his failure to report by citing inadequate education on match-fixing, lack of secure reporting mechanisms, and fear of retaliation. The panel found these arguments unconvincing, noting Arab had received some instruction on reporting obligations and could have reported anonymously. The panel also dismissed comparisons to other cases, such as the Fenerbahce scandal, as irrelevant due to differing circumstances.
The panel upheld the two-year ban, deeming it proportionate given Arab's violation. It highlighted that Arab was approached twice, which aggravated his offense, and noted his sanction fell within the range imposed on teammates involved in the same case. The panel rejected Arab's request for a reduced penalty, stressing the importance of deterring match-fixing and upholding the integrity of football. The decision underscored the obligation of players to report match-fixing approaches, regardless of their cooperation in subsequent investigations.
Ultimately, the CAS dismissed Arab's appeal, confirming the UEFA Appeals Body's decision. The ruling reinforced the principle that disciplinary sanctions for match-fixing violations must balance individual circumstances with the broader need to protect the sport's integrity. The case highlighted the challenges players face in reporting match-fixing and the stringent expectations placed on them to comply with anti-corruption regulations. The panel's decision serves as a reminder of the severe consequences for failing to meet these obligations, even when players cooperate with authorities after the fact.