The First Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber has agreed to the admission of an appeal presented by the former president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) Ángel María Villar against the decision of the Administrative Court of Sports (TAD) of December 2017 to remove him from office for committing a misconduct classified as very serious.
It was on December 22 of that year when The CAS adopted this decision when it detected irregularities in the electoral process for the president of the RFEF, a position for which he was disqualified since his involvement in July 2017 in the ‘Soule case’.
The car of the Supreme, advanced by Information and to which Europa Press has had access, remember that Villar appealed against that decision in 2018, but it was dismissed by the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) and 2019.
According to the Supreme Court, that appeal was against the CAS sanction against Villar, and it was alleged that this was done despite the fact that the norm “expressly excludes” the imposition of the aforementioned sanction, so it does not it was acted on a legal basis for it.
As stated in article 76.2 of Law 10/1990, of October 15, on Sports –recorded in the car–, it is considered a very serious offense by the presidents and other executive members of the governing bodies. Spanish Sports Federations and Professional Leagues, “a) Failure to comply with the agreements of the general assembly, as well as the electoral regulations and other statutory or regulatory provisions.”
The CAS resolution indicated that Villar breached the prescription contained in the Electoral Regulations (article 4.4) because those who present a candidacy to be part of the governing bodies of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) cannot be members of the Management Commission , for which they must cease in this condition when presenting the candidacy in question. It was also considered that violated the duty of neutrality to be observed by the Management Commission according to the Electoral Regulations itselfTherefore, the sanction of dismissal provided for in article 79 of the Sports Law was imposed.
“A real campaign”
The TSJM, when analyzing the matter in its judgment, concluded that Villar was guilty inasmuch as he considered it evident that the fact of occupying the Presidency of the Management Commission of the RFEF obliged him to observe “strict and scrupulous duty of neutrality during the electoral procedure” and that, despite this, the documentation provided “shows that he combined his position as chairman of the Management Commission with a real campaign with a view to his re-election as chairman of the RFEF.
The Madrid court also warned that the Sports Law provides that dismissal can be agreed even when there is no recidivism on the part of the sanctioned when the facts are very serious, as is the case. It also confirmed the proportionality of the sanction imposed and pointed out that Villar’s allegations were irrelevant.
Given that the defense of the former president of the federation did not agree with the resolution, chose to appeal in cassation before the Supreme, High Court that now, after analyzing the brief and having heard the parties – Villar’s defense and the State Attorney – has resolved that there is an objective appeal in the matter for the formation of jurisprudence.
Specifically, it indicates that it is interesting to determine whether the reference to the concept of “aggravating recidivism” contained in article 22.3 a) of Royal Decree 1591/1992, of December 23, as a defining element of the type of offense that article ’15 a ) ‘of the same legal text contemplates, “it must be interpreted, in attention to the constitutional guarantee of the principle of legality contained in article 25 of the Spanish Constitution.” This in the sense of considering whether it constitutes a ‘sine qua non’ requirement to agree to the imposition of the dismissal sanction provided for in the Sports Law.
Caso Soule
It should be remembered that Villar is one of those investigated in the Soule case at the National High Court. It investigates alleged irregularities that have been committed by the main leaders or with their knowledge and consent to “enrich themselves and favor the enrichment of third parties.”
To this end, “a corporate network would have been created that would have allowed the diversion of funds (both public and private) from said associations to companies linked to them, also establishing patronage both in the hiring of personnel, which would fall mainly on family members, as in the alleged arbitrary award of contracts for the supply and provision of services “to companies linked to the alleged plot.
All of this would constitute alleged crimes of unfair administration, misappropriation and / or fraud, embezzlement of public funds, falsification of documents, corruption between individuals and against the Public Treasury.. In July 2021, the judge of the National High Court Alejandro Abascal agreed to extend for six more months, until next January 29, Soule’s instruction.