Felipe Massa and the 2008 Formula 1 World Championship: Why a judicial action is necessary and in which way
Abstract
This article aims to explain from a legal-regulatory point of view why,
in order to protect the credibility of motorsport, it is necessary to clarify
what happened in 2008 and on what are the legal points on which such action can
be based.
The 2008 World Championship and the new circumstances which have arisen.
The 2008’s Formula
One World Championship has always been considered as one of the most exciting
and controversial for several reasons: its epilogue at the last Grand Prix, the
victory of Lewis Hamilton by only one point to the Brazilian Felipe Massa, but
especially for the occurrence of one of the biggest scandals in the history of motorsport:
The Crashgate, which involved the F1 Renault team and which had a substantial
impact on the final results of that year.
Talking about the
Crashgate alone, would require much more than an article and for this reason we
refer to all the official documents about this matter. The relevant point to
extract from this fact is that, the discovery of this unsportsmanlike act
occurred only when the world championship had already been assigned, not only
on track but also from the formal point of view[1] and this situation
had prevented any kind of lawsuit by the Brazilian driver, at least until now.
So, the Championship was
therefore to be considered closed, but recently Bernie Ecclestone, at the time
head of the FOM, declared in an interview to a German newspaper (F1Insider) that himself and the 2008
former FIA President known everything about the Crashgate and had decided to cover
up what happened “in the name of the credibility of motorsport”
” We decided to do
nothing, we
wanted to protect the sport from a huge scandal. I convinced Nelson Piquet senior,
my ex-driver in the past, to keep quiet for the moment. At the time there was a rule
that a world championship standings were untouchable after the FIA awards
ceremony at the end of the year, Hamilton received the trophy and all was well.
We had enough information at the time to
investigate the matter. According to the statute, we should have cancelled
the Singapore race, which would not have been valid for the championship
standings. Felipe Massa would have become world champion, not Lewis Hamilton. Today I’m still sorry for Felipe Massa, he was cheated of the
title he deserved, while Hamilton had all the luck in the world and won his
first championship. Today I would have done things differently.”[2]
These statements have
now become a fact that can be defined as well-known, in the light of the
various sources that report it and the lack of any denial by Mr. Ecclestone
Why a
lawsuit is necessary.
At this point, 15 years later, a completely new and ground-breaking
circumstance arises, that makes this event a one-off in all the history of
motorsport and as such, cannot be treated or compared to any other case.
We are facing one of the greatest alterations of a
sporting result ever existed which, started as a misguided idea of a single
competitor, had become part of a more complex and vast conduct which involved
the highest charges of the Federation and that denied the essence and of the
main laws of the FIA.
How to set a lawsuit and on what basis
The focus of this article is to expose how and
why Felipe Massa should undertake a legal action in order to finally put
clarity on one of the darkest pages in motorsport.
The first thing to analyse it’s the legal base
behind it and where this action should be proposed.
The jurisdiction belongs to the two FIA’s
international courts: The International Tribunal[3] and the International Court of Appeal.
In the case of a denial from this courts, it is also possible to act in front
of the TAS which, however, does not have the necessary regulatory power to
impose any change on the sporting results. For this reason, it is important to
focus on the first hypothesis and how to make it viable, considering that there
are all the procedural requirements.
The main point about procedural rules is about
the time framework provided by FIA laws, briefly mentioned above. On this
matter is important to underline that exists an escape clause that permits, in certain condition, to undertake a
legal action in case of concealed facts and that differs from the “right of
review” as required by different sources like article 179 lett. b of the
International Sporting Code[4] of 2008 or by article 8.3.1 of the
Code of Ethics. The articles which we are referring to are the 12.1.2 lett. c of the ISC 2023 and the 5.3.2 of the FIA Judicial e Disciplinary Rules, which state textually: “However, where the infringement has been concealed from the prosecuting body,
time will run from the day on which the facts of the infringement became known
to the prosecuting body”. This means that the International Tribunal, in
case of a concealed infraction, sets the running time period for a legal action
from the time it became known and this condition makes a lawsuit by Felipe
Massa and more than conceivable, considering that he only discovered (and so
the prosecuting body) this infringement in the last month.
The violations need to be pointed against Max
Mosley (considering him being the FIA president in 2008) and Bernie Ecclestone,
who had breached, firstly, the principles of the FIA statutes specified in art.
2.3, which claim that one of the aims of the Federation is to “enacting,
interpreting and enforcing common rules applicable to the organisation and the
fair and equitable running of motor sport competitions.” Afterwards they violated
art. 2.2 of the FIA’s Code of Ethics, regarding conflict of interest, and
consequentially even the art. 151 lett. c of the ISC of 2008, which said that
needs to be sanctioned “Any fraudulent conduct or any act
prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor
sport generally”. But there is also a violation to the new formulation
of the ISC in the 12.2.1 lett. c, 12.2.1 lett. d, 12.2.1 lett. f, but mostly of
art. 12.2.1 lett. l: the latter, among the others, states that must be
sanctioned every behaviour that undermine “the
principles of fairness in Competition, behaviour in an unsportsmanlike manner
or attempt to influence the result of a Competition in a way that is contrary
to sporting ethics”.
Concerning the request that needs to be made to
the court, it is important to underline that the main reason of this lawsuit is
to re-establish the fairness and credibility of motorsport through the punishment
of a severe and unfair act of which, the Brazilian driver, only suffered as a consequence.
So, the court needs to address at first the guiltiness (that, considering the
statements of Bernie Ecclestone, seems more than clear) and then consequently
excluding the Singapore Race from the Championship and finally reassign the
World Driver Championship of 2008.
Conclusions
As previously mentioned, a lawsuit made by the Brazilian
driver needs to be seen as a legitimate act and it also deserves, not only
because it has got all the procedural requirements, but mostly because it is
the tool capable of grant back credibility to FIA Institutions and to all the
motorsport world, as well as to fix a sporting injustice that, if not solved,
will represent one of the biggest dark spots in all the motorsport history.
[1] The last moment to undertake legal
action, in conformity with FIA rules, about a Formula 1 season it is
represented by the FIA Gala Award prize ceremony, which crystallizes the
sporting results.
[2] Quote available on different
sport newspaper, in this case the quote comes from Eurosport.
[3] Pursuant to the FIA Judicial
and Disciplinary Rules and its article 5, the international Tribunal has the
jurisdiction on this case, not only for the people involved (FIA members), but
also for the subject (Enforcement of the FIA rules).
[4] From now on ISC.
Commenti
Posta un commento