Official statement

In view of the recent announcements made by the president of the CSD (Superior Sports Council) regarding the TAD (Administrative Tribunal for Sport) report, it should be noted:

• The RFEF wishes to clarify that the TAD file has nothing to do with the allegedly criminal behavior being investigated by Majadahonda Court 4 ( Brody case), but with an alleged and wholly refuted excess in the functions in an entity that has not been able to conclude its electoral process, given multiple external interferences.
• It would seem absolutely incomprehensible in law that the TAD considers the RFEF request to appear as a private prosecutor in a case of alleged corruption, in which this institution would be affected to be a very serious infringement
• The RFEF appeals for the protection of the values of Spanish football and the honesty of its leaders and workers, given that the management committee has always acted in accordance with the law in the exercising of its powers.
• It is necessary to emphasize that the Federation has been run by an interim administration since last September, when the management team, in a move initiated by the then Secretary of State, Victor Francos, proposed a call for elections.
• In this sense, regarding the need to hold elections for president or a double election for president and Assembly members, a consultation was sent to the CSD on September 20 and a reminder issued on October 17, without any response from this body.
• During all this period, the RFEF was waiting for the Government to approve the ministerial order allowing the elections to be held. This was delayed for months and was finally signed by the current president of the CSD at the end of January of this year.
• The RFEF has acted with the utmost responsibility at all times, firstly, to move on from the crisis triggered by the events surrounding former president Luis Rubiales during the World Cup in Sydney and, subsequently, by taking decisions at a sporting level regarding the operational management essential for the normal functioning of the RFEF. All decisions have been taken with the utmost caution and respect, given the state of flux in which the institution has found itself.

Regarding the alleged infractions attributed to the members of the management team in the TAD file, we would like to highlight the following:

Dismissal of Andreu Camps

• This decision did not go through the management, therefore it is not something attributable to its members.
• The dismissal of the former general secretary Andreu Camps from his position among the senior management personnel (according to RFEF statutes), has not been challenged by Mr. Camps himself and was a decision endorsed, precisely, by the CSD itself.

Renewal of coach Luis de la Fuente

• This was an essential sporting decision for the benefit of the Spanish national football team. The previous contract was due to expire on June 30 2024, so in view of the possibility that the coach’s contract would expire in the middle of the European Championships, the decision to exercise an existing extension clause was approved.

 CVC

•  The RFEF understood that this venture was not in the best interests of the institution. It has also been verified that the withdrawal did not cause any economic damage to the institution. It also coincides with the withdrawal of other lawsuits and complaints filed at the time by the former president, Luis Rubiales, against journalists, columnists, media and talk show hosts and even member of his own family.
• The settlement of income from audiovisual rights that corresponded to the RFEF was guaranteed and it was subsequently proven that, if this decision had not been taken, economic damage would have occurred, as has been demonstrated in the latest ruling on the case.
• It is neither a political trial, as indicated by the TAD, nor does it compromise the future Presidency of the RFEF.

VAR

• This decision did not go through the management, therefore it is not something attributable to its members.
• It is a public tender agreement that was provisionally awarded.
• If the process of putting it out for public tender had not been initiated at the time and in the way it was, there was a real risk of not having VAR available in professional competitions for next season.
• The entire public tendering process and its phases are available to see on the website. An example of absolute transparency on the part of the RFEF.
• It should be remembered that the VAR is financed by the League, so in any case it cannot cause economic damage to the RFEF.

 

• Following these assessments, it is also concluded that the members of the Management Committee have not been given a fair hearing and that the opening of the case was made on the basis of press reports and communiqués.
• Members of the Management Committee reserve the right to legal action in defense of their interests, given the lack of rigor and legal justification of the CAS disciplinary file, as well as the adoption of precautionary measures considered unfair by the bodies that have to resolve them.