October 22: The questions UEFA sent to FIFA and its president Gianni Infantino following last week’s FIFA Council meeting include a section titled “Conflicts of interest and institutional responsibility”.
The questions all relate to Infantino’s contact with US President Donald Trump and are the first set of consolidated questions about the “decisions, transactions and interventions” surrounding his growing public relationship that the football world watched in real time with varying degrees of disgust and disappointment.
“These matters, taken together, raise issues that go beyond the ordinary institutional relationship between FIFA and the government of a World Cup host country,” UEFA said.
UEFA says there are “serious questions about potential conflicts of interest, transparency and institutional accountability. These include:
- The FIFA Peace Prize, which was not submitted to the FIFA Council for approval;
- The seven-year, approximately $4 million office lease in Trump Tower, New York, involving Eric Trump, for premises unused for much of the year;
- The proposed agreement with Thrive Capital, led by Mr. Joshua Kushner, a member of the US President’s family;
- US President’s phone call to FIFA President asking for intervention in Balogun disciplinary case;
- Advanced discussions have been reported with the US president and people associated with him about a FIFA cryptocurrency;
- The World Cup sponsorship deal with Kalshi, a company advised and partly owned by Donald Trump Jr., including reports that Kalshi received extensive advertising exposure without providing financial consideration to FIFA;
- The last-minute move of the World Cup draw, allegedly at significant additional cost to FIFA, to the JFK/Donald Trump Center in Washington, DC, instead of Las Vegas;
- The involvement of the daughter and grandson of the President of the USA in the Club World Cup draw;
- The announcement of a $75 million investment in Palestine during the US President’s Peace Board meeting, apparently without prior information being provided or approval from the FIFA Finance Committee or Council being sought;
- Public statements by White House officials, including Andrew Giuliani and the President of the United States himself, defending the FIFA president, supporting his continued presidency and criticizing those who question his leadership.”
UEFA is asking FIFA for a detailed explanation of these arrangements and interventions, including the decision-making processes, and “the identification and management of potential conflicts of interest, the financial implications for FIFA and to what extent the relevant FIFA bodies were informed or consulted?”
As for the issues that would affect Infantino’s future leadership of FIFA, and which worry even his biggest supporters, the suggestion that, along with the deal to create FIFA Football Enterprise with Thrive Capital, was another deal for Infantino himself that would see him move from the presidency of FIFA to running the business he would have created.
“Can FIFA confirm whether, had the FFE proceeded, the FIFA President would have held or expected to hold any office, role or function in the FFE or any related entity, during or after his term as FIFA President? Could FIFA also confirm whether the FIFA President would have had, directly or indirectly, any financial interest, participation, right to remuneration or other economic benefits arising from the FFE?” UEFA asks.
For Infantino to have serious credibility and regain the trust that has been lost, Infantino must answer these questions truthfully. If there was no contract in place for Infantino then no problem, what’s the problem with not answering the questions around FFE. But multiple sources have said a contract was in place and Infantino’s pay was reportedly around $30 million a year.
UEFA’s questions also raise a new side to the question of whether Infantino’s actions were criminal or not, with the revelation “from various sources” that two days before the vote on the FFE proposal, “the FIFA president informed the members of the Board of Directors that the American authorities were investigating the administration of FIFA. Can he confirm whether such a statement was made and, if so, explain the information on which it was based at the time it was based and, if so, explain the information on which it was based at the time.pressure it might exert on members immediately before its decision on FFE?
Many would welcome a new US Department of Justice investigation into FIFA along the lines of the 2015 investigation. That RICO (Corrupt Organizations and Mafia Influence Act) investigation never found enough evidence to convict a mob boss, but it did find many corrupt individuals.
Contact the writer of this story at (email protected)