Suárez case, the FIGC Prosecutor’s Office moves. But what does Juventus risk?

From our correspondent Valerio Piccioni

24th September
– Perugia

In the next few hours, the chief prosecutor of the Football Federation Giuseppe Chinè will write to Raffaele Cantone to ask him for the documents of the investigation into the “mess” of Luis Suárez’s Italian exam. Article 129 of the FIGC Code of Sports Justice expressly provides for this possibility “if the Federal Prosecutor’s Office considers that, in the Public Ministry, or other judicial authorities of the State, we have established deeds or compiled relevant documents.” At that time, the Perugia prosecutor will have two options: wait for the investigation to be closed or send papers, considering the risk of “evidentiary contamination” has been overcome. It is likely that, as has been the practice in recent years, there may be an immediate shipment of some of the material from Perugia to Rome.

In parallel

–

But with the cards in hand, what will the football prosecutor do? You will begin to evaluate the documents, aware that there could be important research updates. However, the two investigations will be conducted in parallel. A criminal presentation could also correspond to a sports conviction. It is clear that at this moment we are thinking at least partially in the dark. Also because the suspects are all outside the football system.

Articles

–

For sports justice, the most delicate phase is the initial one: the role of Juve that gives the “incipit” to the path of that Italian exam in Suárez that then ends the mess. Yesterday, the Turkish lawyer ruled out any type of responsibility, even claiming the veracity of all the passages of the interlocution with Perugia. The FIGC code established after the 2001 passportpoli storm (disqualification of several players, seven teams sanctioned with maximum fines) a specific offense provided for in article 32, paragraph 7: “Companies and their directors, registrants, shareholders and not the shareholders referred to in article 2, paragraph 2, who directly carry out or attempt to carry out or allow others to carry out acts aimed at obtaining false or altered citizenship certificates or documents in order to circumvent the rules of entry into Italy for the registration of non-EU players, are responsible by applying the sanctions mentioned in paragraphs 8 and 9 below “. Sanctions that provide, depending on the severity, a fine only for strict liability, and for direct with penalties, descent to last place or exclusion from the championships.

“Lack of loyalty”

–

“Suppose that ethically it is a black page that reports a past that seemed to never return. For the moment, however, I really do not believe that on the basis of the known documents there can be a call for the violation of Article 32 – says the ” Lawyer Mattia Grassani, sports law expert – The element of the telephone call between the legal advisor and the university does not lead to identifying the responsibility in obtaining citizenship on the part of the player. Without prejudice to the principle of not guilty, it could be investigated for breach of loyalty. In that case, however, it could only lead to a fine. ”

“Embryonic stage”

–

Even the lawyer Eduardo Chiacchio, also with a long career in trials in the sports field, is quite cautious: “I do not know the letters and the specific case. The matter, if a violation is found, would fall in my opinion.” in the broad channel of paragraph 1 of article 4 and not in article 32, since it is a pre-embryonic phase of a membership “.