Fifa president Sepp Blatter delivers his speech during the 65th Fifa
congress in Zurich on May 29, 2015. PHOTO | MICHAEL BUHOLZER |
AFP
There was something sickeningly and appallingly familiar about
the lead-up to and eventual election of the President of the Federation
of International Football Federations (Fifa) on Friday evening and in
2011. Then, as now, the poll was held amid high-profile carnage and
red-hot wreckage of a corruption scandal involving officials in Fifa’s
innermost sanctum.
Then, as now, President Sepp Blatter
blamed the graft scandal blighting his global administration of
football on exalted but wayward and evasive individuals on the Fifa high
table. On both occasions, it was about allegations of corruption
bedevilling the process that made Russia and Qatar hosts of the 2018 and
2022 Fifa World Cups respectively.
As a fig leaf, Fifa
hired American lawyer Michael Garcia to investigate accusations that
its all-powerful 22-member Executive Committee was bribed to make Russia
and Qatar World Cup hosts. When he handed in his report last November,
Fifa publicly said Mr Garcia had cleared the organisation of the charges
of bribery.
Mr Garcia publicly disagreed with Fifa’s
summary of his report and resigned. He asked Fifa to make his report
public in its entirety. That has not happened.
But
last week, as Fifa fatcats were arrested in dawn raids from their
exclusive seaside Zurich hotel, spin doctor Walter de Gregario brazenly
claimed Swiss police were acting on Fifa’s prompting.
Four
years ago, as three days ago, Mr Blatter cast himself as the person
best positioned to both reform and rid Fifa of corruption. On Friday, as
in 2011, Mr Blatter, who has been at Fifa for 40 years, presented
himself as the stalwart who would not allow his beloved organisation to
be dragged through the muck of corruption.
The
79-year-old’s I-am-innocent-but-will-clean-up-the-mess creed is a
self-preservation strategy. It worked in 2011 and again on Friday.
But
this simple question portends a huge test: Can he rid Fifa of graft now
when he has been helmsman for 17 years? Fifa requires inclusivity,
transparency and accountability, which are unlikely to come from within.
EXCLUSIVE CLUB
Here’s
why. If Fifa was a business, auditors would have scrutinised its books
of account and the board and shareholders would long ago have demanded
the exit of Mr Blatter & Co. Fifa is not a business but an exclusive
club for an elitist clique whose members cannot make demands of Mr
Blatter.
If Fifa were a non-governmental organisation,
it would get donor funds as the principal recipient and disburse these
to sub-recipients (SRs) to carry out specific projects. The SRs would be
required to account to Fifa which would, in turn, be held to account by
the donor. Nobody holds Fifa to account.
If the six
confederations that make up Fifa were answerable to respective national
football bodies and they, in turn, were answerable to local football
fraternities (we, the fans), then, there would be bottom-up and up-down
lines of answerability. That is not the case here.
Fifa
rules the world’s truly global and most popular sport, which is awash
with money. That means power: Brazil changed its law to allow for the
sale of alcohol at the 2014 World Cup venues because Fifa demanded it
because a beer-maker is its sponsor.
Of course, the World Cup is the ultimate and global marketing platform and, therefore, a fortune-maker for Fifa.
In
the lead-up to the 2014 World Cup, FIFA.com reported in a post titled
FAQ: Setting the record straight that: “In fact, Fifa spends 550,000 USD
on worldwide football development — every single day. What is more, we
also spend nearly 2 million USD on organising international competitions
— every single day.”
In March, Business Insider,
quoting Fifa’s 2014 financial statement, reported that the organisation
generated US$4.8 billion from the World Cup in Brazil in revenue and a
profit of US$2.6 billion. Of the money so generated, US$2.4 billion was
from TV rights fees, US$1.6 billion from sponsorships and US$527 million
in ticket sales.
But Fifa did not contribute to the
construction of stadia or transport infrastructure, which gobbled up
most of the US$15 billion Brazil spent on the World Cup. That was borne
by Brazilian taxpayers. Fifa invests zilch to get rich; exploits dirt
poor fans to get filthy rich!
Exclusive, rich and
powerful, Fifa cannot reform itself. But corporate sponsors Coca-Cola,
VISA, Hyundai, KIA and Adidas, and others, which back Fifa to the tune
of US$50 million annually, can force the organisation on the path of
reform.
These sponsors must use the power of their
money to force Fifa to embrace inclusivity, good governance and
accountability. Fifa needs independent, global oversight.
Opanga is a media consultant; wkopanga@gmail.com
No comments :
Post a Comment