A question of ethics as FIFA createS new committee

It will be presented by Sepp Blatter, the Fifa president, as the answer to the growing Italian crisis suggesting a game mired in corruption. But this will be like a court which, as David Will, the British member of the Fifa executive, puts it, is “without any rules.’’

The way this new ethics committee has come about — there is already an existing non-independent one — is a fascinating story of how the governing body of world football operates and an unexpected result of a major rift between Blatter and his close confidant and friend Jack Warner, one of the most powerful men in Fifa and president of the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football.

The story starts in Trinidad, where a daily newspaper ran a series of articles alleging that Simpaul, a travel company owned by the Warner family, was involved in selling World Cup packages.

This, said the paper, raised major ethical issues of conflicts of interest.

Warner believes these articles were politically motivated. He is vice-president of the opposition United National Congress party and the newspaper is close to the ruling party, the People’s National Movement.

He decided to ask Fifa’s existing ethics committee to rule on the issue and the committee ruled that there was a conflict and referred Warner to the executive.

At a tense executive meeting in March, Warner, extremely unhappy with the ethics committee going public, told the executive he had cut all ties with Simpaul.

During the hour-long discussion he also revealed that the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Patrick Manning, no friend of Warner, had actually rung Blatter to ask for World Cup tickets, Trinidad being in England’s group.

Blatter passed the call on to Jerome Champagne, the assistant general secretary. By the end of the meeting, Blatter found himself in a minority. While he wanted the Warner case to be referred to the disciplinary committee, his fellow executive members were convinced by Warner’s explanations.

Warner said: “Lennart Johansson [president of Uefa] supported me, as did David Will, all the South Americans and many others. Only Africa did not but then Africa have never supported me.’’

For Blatter to be opposed to Warner is remarkable. Warner was crucial in getting him elected twice as president and when I spoke to Warner he said sorrowfully: “I can only say there must have been some misunderstanding. I was very upset. This week he told the executive and also my own Concacaf that he was wrong and apologised. I am happy to accept that.’’

However, when Blatter proposed a new ethics committee, he ran into problems about the rules governing this committee. So while the Congress decision will be presented as a great Fifa step, the real battle for the rules governing ethics is yet to come.