www.rdes.it

ARTICLE 6(1) ECHR AND INTERNATIONAL SPORTS ARBITRATION: BETWEEN (CERTAIN) BOUNDARIES AND (YET UNCERTAIN) CONSEQUENCES
by Saverio Paolo Spera

AVAILABLE IN OPEN ACCESS

Saverio Paolo Spera is an Italian qualified attorney-at-law. He holds a degree in law from the university of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ and an LL.M in International Business Law from King’s College London. He has practiced civil and employment law in Italy for several years and worked at the Asser International Sports Law Centre in the Hague, carrying out research in the field of international sports arbitration, before joining FIFA in 2017. Until May 2024, he was a senior legal counsel within the Litigation Department, representing FIFA before the Court of Arbitration for Sport in more than 150 proceedings. In the spring of 2024, he has co-founded SP.IN Law, a Zurich based international sports law firm.
He regularly publishes articles on issues related to sports law and lectures in international sports law programmes.

Abstract

In the years following the Mutu-Pechstein judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), practitioners in the field of sports law might have noticed a significant increase in the reliance that parties have made on the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in their submissions before sports dispute resolution bodies. In particular, a complaint about alleged violations of their right to a fair trial protected by Article 6(1) ECHR has been often brought up in that context. While it is no longer doubted that this provision binds CAS panels in the adjudication of appeals brought before their attention, there is still some degree of approximation regarding the boundaries within which Article 6(1) ECHR finds room for application in the context of international sports arbitration. This paper aims at shedding some light on this and on the (yet uncertain) consequences of a misapplication of the rule in question.

Negli anni che hanno seguito la sentenza Mutu-Pechstein della Corte europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo, gli operatori del diritto sportivo potrebbero aver notato un aumento significativo del ricorso alle disposizioni della Convenzione Europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo (CEDU) da parte delle parti nei loro ricorsi agli organi di risoluzione delle controversie sportive. In particolare, in questo contesto è stata spesso sollevata una denuncia per presunte violazioni del diritto a un processo equo tutelato dall'articolo 6(1) della CEDU. Sebbene non vi siano più dubbi sul fatto che questa disposizione vincoli le formazioni arbitrali del TAS nel giudicare gli appelli sottoposti alla loro attenzione, vi è ancora un certo grado di approssimazione riguardo i confini entro i quali l'articolo 6(1) CEDU trova spazio di applicazione nel contesto dell'arbitrato sportivo internazionale. Il presente contributo intende fare luce su questo aspetto e sulle conseguenze (ancora incerte) di una errata applicazione della norma in questione.

Keywords

ECHR – International sports arbitration – Independent and impartial tribunal – Civil rights and obligations – Adversarial proceedings – Equality of arms – Public hearing – Sports Governing Bodies – Court of Arbitration for Sport – Swiss Federal Tribunal – Swiss public policy.

CEDU – Arbitrato internazionale sportivo – Tribunale indipendente e imparziale – Diritti e doveri di carattere civile – Procedimenti in contraddittorio – Parità di armi – Udienza pubblica – Organi di governo dello sport – Tribunale arbitrale dello sport – Tribunale federale svizzero – Ordine pubblico.