Football is a popular, world-famous sport that generates huge financial flows. Thanks to taxes and the various taxes they charge, States participate in the development of this discipline by building stadiums, supporting national teams, supervising small teams...
The organization responsible for the management and development of football at an international level is known: it is the International Football Federation (FIFA). Although officially a non-profit association, this organization handles astronomical sums. It was set up as an independent international government structure, a bit like central banks, even though the latter's missions are disproportionate to that of FIFA. Football's loaded organization runs a fun activity while central banks look after an essential common good: currency.
Provoke the leaders
FIFA had announced revenue of 7.25 billion euros (4.756 billion CFA francs) in the last four years and after the World Cup in Qatar. Net profit would thus reach 967 million euros (634 million F CFA). Of this amount, around 290 million euros (190 million CFA francs) would be allocated to financially support the federations after the coronavirus pandemic. Remember that in 2015, an investigation launched by the United States Department of Justice for corruption gave rise to a major scandal, which precipitated the departure of some of FIFA's directors.
We also cannot forget the governance problems identified in continental confederations and national associations. FIFA, like its affiliates, seems to mock the government representatives of the people who, apparently, let themselves be affected by the issues. Given the international context, characterized by slow global growth and increasing poverty, it is no longer acceptable for a small group of people to manage the enormous sums of world football and believe that they can do anything.
The renovations we recommend come from several requests. First, we must get states back in the saddle. This implies giving them back their power vis-à-vis FIFA, in particular redefining the limits within which they exercise democratic control over the federation and its various satellites. Therefore, it is necessary to question beforehand whether or not FIFA, a non-profit association, is allowed to make profits.
Shareholder states
Created more than a hundred years ago in a totally different context and marked by the complexity of contemporary problems, FIFA should develop its legal status, as well as its intervention procedures and rules. Going from the status of an association to that of an international public establishment with legal personality would not be heresy.
Bonuses earned internationally, for reasons of equity, should be returned to national budgets
This change would thus allow for the establishment of a share capital and for the various FIFA member states to become its shareholders while participating in the proper functioning of the governing bodies. These could be structured into a Board of Directors – which would meet quarterly – made up of senior national football experts, and a Board of Governors – biannual – represented by the Ministers responsible for Sport. A bit like organisms in Bretton Woods: World Bank and IMF.
FIFA reform also requires some transparency from national federations. In countries where a large part of the population lives on less than a dollar a day, it is normal for the State to take for granted the probity of the management teams appointed in national federations. It is obviously up to these States to define sports policies, coordinating their respective budgets, in particular those relating to their participation in international competitions. On the other hand, the prizes received internationally, for reasons of equity, would benefit from being returned to national budgets in order to guarantee their good use and a better distribution of this wealth among the population.
Code of ethics and political will
The professionalization of the institution's governance is also one of the measures to consider within the framework of the reform we recommend. This could involve limiting the obligation of the FIFA president and his main collaborators to five years, renewable once. It would then be necessary to appoint real leaders instead of favoring the “co-optation” of former footballers without management skills.
It would also be appropriate to make directors' emoluments public, to ensure dual control of the organization's activities through at least two international companies chosen by the United Nations. It is important that Member States are able to import an ethical charter and a system of communicating so that they can better monitor the evolution of the organization's activities.
This reform would be incomplete if it did not include a social component. It would be up to FIFA, for example, to expand the list of beneficiaries of the benefits of football activity. We can well imagine that FIFA dedicates 20% of its profits to support the cause of children and the disabled.
For these reforms to see the light of day, political will is needed, as FIFA appears a priori to be a “mammoth” difficult to maneuver, which has always lived in comfort and which today crystallizes the interests of large multinational companies. Recognized for not compromising with the rules of good governance, the United States can present itself as the competent authority for this gigantic work website.
