risico-indicatoren | sportmanagement24

LEGISLATION

Intro risk indicators

This section consists of two parts: risk indicators for match fixing on the one hand and risk indicators for human trafficking in transfers on the other hand. This is not exclusively but mainly focused on football.

Risk indicators (e.g. multi-club ownership, sports betting) are certain phenomena, features in legislation, or organizational structures that can give rise to various forms of sports-related fraud. Below you can find the risk indicators that the PrOFS research identified for match fixing and human trafficking in football transfers. We link these to existing legislation and regulations that may or may not address these risk indicators in a suitable manner. recommendations are then formulated per risk indicator.

Match-fixing Risk Indicators

Sports betting can directly lead to gambling-related match fixing. This is because potential fixers try to increase their profits on the gambling market by determining the outcome or course of a match in advance. The general vulnerability that sports betting entails is reinforced by developments in the offer.

You can bet live and online on the result of sports matches, but also on the course of the game, such as the number of yellow or red cards, penalties, fouls, scores per set, etc.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

With regard to the types of bets the Gambling Act states that there is a ban on participation in a game of chance if there is a possibility of direct influence on the result. There is also a ban on offering bets on events where the outcome is known in advance and/or where the majority of participants are under 21 years old. In addition, the Gaming Commission can prohibit bets if the fair conduct of the event cannot be guaranteed or if it believes that specific betting options are susceptible to fraud.

Disciplinary measures also apply. Athletes and other sports actors are generally banned from participating in sports betting. KBVB also states, for example, that sports actors may not have an interest in entities that offer (sports) betting. Since January 1, 2023, Sport Vlaanderen has ‘sports fraud’ placed among the hard indicators for subsidizing sports federations. Through this policy measure, federations are encouraged, for example, to ban the distribution of insider information that can reasonably be expected to be used in the context of a bet.

With regard to the gambler, the Gambling Act states that online and land-based betting shops must identify gamblers. In addition, online and physical betting shops must carry out Excluded Person Information System (EPIS) checks before clients can place bets. EPIS allows individuals to be excluded due to the nature of their profession, due to gambling addiction identified by stakeholders, on their own initiative, …

ProOFS Recommendations

Several types of bets are susceptible to fraud. For example, proposition bets (spot bets), where bets are placed on aspects of an event that are not related to the outcome (e.g. number of yellow cards, score at half-time, number of corners, etc.), give rise to spot-fixing. In order to reduce the risk of match-fixing, the range that betting operators offer on the legal market can be restricted.
Identifying gamblers is crucial in the fight against match-fixing. If gamblers are identified, they can later be held responsible for their match-fixing actions. If not, they may escape punishment. Ideally, one always identifies and links the individual to the bet placed, regardless of who the bet is placed with and regardless of the amount.
In order to reduce the risk of match-fixing, (professional) athletes can be excluded from participating in (sports) betting via EPIS. This also brings the legislation more in line with the prohibitions as provided for in disciplinary regulations.

If athletes do not receive their salary (on time), they can rely on general labor legislation. To the extent that the athlete is an employee of the club, the club is obliged, according to the Belgian legislator, to pay the athlete's salary in the manner, time and place agreed in the contract. What if the club doesn't do this?

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

If the employer (club) does not do this, it risks an administrative fine or a criminal sanction. However, labor legislation does not directly contribute to the prevention of payment defaults, which means that athletes may still find themselves in vulnerable situations.

The FIFA Fund provides financial support to players who, due to the legal or financial problems of their previous or current club, are unable to obtain payment of outstanding salaries. Although this is an important measure, it is not suitable for preventing match fixing as it does not prevent defaults, but rather provides legal action for athletes after the default persists.

Licensing regulations in football federations can be useful in preventing defaults. Through the licensing rules, federations encourage clubs to pay their athletes on time and in full. Defaults can lead to not receiving a license for the season following the default.

ProOFS Recommendations

Sports federations should monitor the extent to which athletes are paid on time and in full by their club based on evidence and controls.
Sports federations can provide for measures that limit the expenditure of sports clubs according to their financial capabilities. This limits financial problems and prevents athletes from defaulting.
When defaults are identified, sports federations can provide sanctions that require clubs to prioritize payment of athletes. Sports federations can postpone scheduled matches involving affected athletes or impose temporary transfer bans until the problem is resolved.

Multi-club ownership is the situation where a single investor (e.g., an individual or legal entity) owns the majority of the shares (i.e., more than 50%) in more than one club. Multi-club ownership can affect the integrity of the competition when two or more clubs with the same ownership meet in a sports competition. A (part) owner could exert influence within the clubs to achieve the result that is the most financially attractive. Multi-club ownership is therefore a risk for match fixing.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

UEFA and KBVB regulations regarding multi-club ownership prevent clubs from having direct or indirect interests in other clubs. No one may be involved in the management or sporting performance of more than one club in a UEFA competition at the same time. Individuals or companies may also not exercise control or influence over multiple clubs in the same competition.

Control means, for example, having the most shareholder voting rights, being able to appoint or remove board members, or otherwise determine the club's decisions.

Under the Pro League club licensing regulations, a club will not be granted a license if one or more associated entities are also legally linked to another professional football club. This also applies to minority shareholders, who may not have financial or other interests in legal entities involved in other professional clubs. The limit is 10% of the voting rights, while UEFA rules set this at 50%. Entities that can (in)directly influence a license candidate (i.e., a football club that wants to participate in a Belgian professional competition) are also targeted by the integrity provision of the Pro League. Furthermore, chairmen or directors may not combine these positions with a similar position at another professional football club.

ProOFS Recommendations

Sports federations must reduce multi-club ownership, at least where sports clubs with the same (part) owner can compete against each other in the same competition, to ensure the integrity of the competition. This requires that sports federations are aware of the ownership structures of the sports clubs and request and check this information again at regular intervals.

It is also important that not only majority shareholders, for example, but also individual entities that have a minority interest in or control over the club are taken into account. The stricter one is in the application of multi-club ownership restrictions, the lower the risk of match fixing becomes.

Criminal infiltration is the situation in which criminals become active in sports clubs, for example by purchasing the club, sponsoring it, taking on management positions, etc. Such phenomena can create situations in which the club becomes dependent on these ‘criminal benefactors’. This dependence can lead to the ‘criminal benefactor’ can force others to directly influence the outcome or course of a match.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

Government legislation does not provide for access restrictions on which person can become (part) owner of a sports club. Clubs can set conditions for the sale of shares themselves. For non-profit organizations there may be rules about who can become a member. Judges also have the option to ban someone convicted of match fixing from holding a position such as director or manager of a sports club.

ProOFS Recommendations

Restricting access to the market for (potential) investors-owners of sports clubs by imposing professional and qualitative standards.
Introduce fit and proper person tests. These tests include an overall assessment of an individual's integrity, financial position, character and professional skills. The evaluation may include objective and subjective aspects such as legal issues (e.g. involvement in financial irregularities, criminal records, etc.)
This assessment can be done by the sports federation, and ideally by an independent body with specialists who have knowledge of ownership structures. If it is judged that the (potential) investor does not meet the access conditions, access to the market must be refused.
To ensure the continued quality of investor-owners, sports federations must be aware of the ownership structures of the sports clubs and request and review this information at regular intervals. Of course, changes regarding ‘fit and cleanliness’ must also be dealt with properly. from existing investor-owners.

Match fixing must be responded to and sanctioned appropriately. The sanctioning options are divided into two possible routes: on the one hand, the criminal route and on the other hand, the disciplinary route via the sports federations. However, both routes require a sound design, in the sense that cases of match fixing can also effectively lead to appropriate sanctions. In other words, loopholes in the law and regulations must be avoided that could lead to evasion of criminal and/or disciplinary responsibility.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

Currently, match-fixing is not explicitly included in Belgian criminal law, despite it being considered a criminal offence. However, it can be prosecuted as bribery or fraud.

FIFA does have disciplinary match-fixing provisions.

ProOFS Recommendations

Match fixing is banned in Belgium regarded as a criminal offence. The criminal law response to cases of match fixing is ideally the same across sports, i.e. the criminal law response does not differ depending on the type of sport – e.g. individual sport vs. team sport. Furthermore, the criminal justice response must take into account the characteristics of match fixing in order to avoid potential loopholes. Although several jurisdictions have adopted specific match-fixing provisions over the years, match-fixing can also be combated through pre-existing, non-specific criminal legislation.
Disciplinary frameworks of sports federations should be clear and go hand in hand with consistent enforcement so that athletes and other sports actors can reasonably assess the consequences of their actions.

Transfers and human trafficking risk indicators

Human trafficking in sports involves crossing national borders. Young athletes are being lured under false pretenses by middlemen to sports clubs in the Global North in the hope of securing a contract and thus improving their financial situation. International travel in the context of a transfer therefore poses a risk of human trafficking.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

The FIFA RSTP rules govern international transfers of footballers and must be followed by clubs and national federations. These rules help increase the visibility of international transfers and first registrations, especially for minors, through the FIFA Transfer Matching System (TMS). Although the system collects data on transfers, it relies on the information entered by clubs, meaning data falsification is possible and not always easy for sports federations to check. The TMS also provides insight into employment contracts, allowing the detection of exploitation of athletes. The national (football) federation reiterates the measures provided for at FIFA level with regard to minors.

Recommendations PrOFS

Sports federations must gather information and put in place procedures that protect athletes from situations of abuse before, during and after the international movement of an athlete in the context of a transfer.

Preliminary checks involve requesting evidence about; the identity of the athlete and the supervisor, club, travel information, employment contract, accommodation and reception. Equipped with protective measures: contact point at the sports federation, prior contact with the athlete.

Checks during the stay: contact with athlete in person to check the situation (compliance with agreements, treatment by club, accommodation and reception, …).

Checks after the stay: check for safe return to home country or onward travel through contact with athlete, club, responsible supervisor and competent sports federation in other jurisdiction.

Continuous reporting throughout each phase of the transfer

Sports agents are the biggest contributors to human trafficking in sports. Fraudulent sports agents exploit the vulnerability of young athletes by promising them trial periods and contracts with (football) clubs in the Global North. They charge considerable fees for this. In the end, the athletes often become victims of exploitation.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

Flemish regulations stipulate that sports agents must meet conditions such as quality and expertise requirements. Furthermore, sports agents must pay a deposit (€25,000) and must not have a criminal record. FIFA Football Agent Regulations state that football agents must obtain a license by passing an exam and undergoing a criminal and disciplinary history check. FIFA also supervises the activities of football agents.

ProOFS Recommendations

Limit access to the market for (potential) sports agents by imposing professional and qualitative standards.

Introducing fit and proper person tests. This includes an overall assessment of character, integrity, financial position, professional skills, … of an individual. The evaluation may include various aspects such as legal issues (e.g. involvement in financial irregularities, etc.).

This assessment can be made by the government as well as by the sports federation, and should in any case be as uniform as possible across borders. If it is judged that the (potential) sports agent does not meet the entry conditions, access to the market must be refused.

Football academies are organizations that train young players and provide them with the necessary infrastructure and training facilities. Their goal is to be able to resell the players to clubs later. In some cases we see private (unofficial) academies, which operate without interference from (inter)national football federations or governments. Their training facilities are often substandard and the coaches unqualified. Athletes and their families pay a lot of money in the hope of pursuing a career in professional football. Profit is sought by keeping the costs of running the academy low and selling the athletes to (foreign) clubs. Given the risk posed by academies and their role in the transfer market as a vehicle for wealthy clubs to buy athletes at low prices and sell them at high prices, they are considered a risk indicator for human trafficking.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

FIFA RSTP rules require academies to report underage players to the national football federation. This applies to academies affiliated with clubs, but private academies are often unaffiliated and outside FIFA's jurisdiction. This allows them to avoid reporting obligations, which increases the risk of abuse. Clubs that work with private academies may be held responsible if minors are not reported. International transfers of athletes from private academies to clubs must be registered with the federation.

ProOFS Recommendations

Sports federations impose qualitative criteria on private academies, in particular with regard to (sports) infrastructure, sporting training of (underage) athletes.

Provide protection measures for (underage) athletes who join a private academy (e.g. impose the same conditions as for academies affiliated with clubs).

When private academies allow control of sports federations, the sports federations can impose on clubs and other sports actors under their jurisdiction (e.g. sports agents) not to do business with the private academy.

A trial period, or tryout, is a short period of time during which an athlete is assessed by a club with no guarantee of a contract. It allows potential athletes to demonstrate their skills. Tryouts are common in many sports and can lead to transfers. However, they are often linked to human trafficking, where athletes sometimes give money or documents to, for example, the agent and are then left behind. This makes trial periods a risk indicator for human trafficking.

What is the link with legislation and regulations?

The FIFA Trial Form ensures that national football associations are aware of trial periods and the arrival of athletes. The form also regulates which party is responsible for costs such as travel and accommodation, to provide athletes with financial security. Agents are prohibited from charging money to arrange a trial period, which protects athletes from exploitation. Although clubs are not obliged to cover all costs, there is still little transparency about the costs covered by the athlete themselves. Stricter rules apply to minors, including obligations for clubs regarding costs and accommodation. All in all, thanks to the FIFA Trial Form, overall transparency has improved.

ProOFS Recommendations

For participation of athletes in trial periods/try-outs in another jurisdiction, see recommendations under cross-border athlete mobility.