Rocchi, Abodi accuses the FIGC and asks for clarification from CONI: commissioner hypothesis

The (possible) crack in the system produced the immediate reaction of the Minister for Sport and Youth Andrea Abodi who, as is known, is working for a radical reform of Italian football, which goes beyond the name of the next federal president. It is precisely from here that his post on And this is indisputable.

attack on the figc

—

The second part, however, is a direct attack on the Federation, with serious accusations: “I read, like all of you, the implications that are emerging from the investigation by the Milan Prosecutor’s Office, which started from the complaint of a former member of The Hague. Leaving the judicial authority the task of carrying out its work and without wanting to go into the merits of the work of the Can Rocchi designator, the most serious aspect that emerges is the way in which the same complaint has been managed within the football system. So far, no public feedback, just as we do not know who received the complaint and which body was responsible for the matter to verify its existence”. In fact, an accusation to the FIGC Prosecutor’s Office led by Giuseppe Chinè who in reality was only aware of the “knock” case in Lissone and who investigated this in depth (seven hearings) later deeming the complaint from member Aia Rocca “unfounded” and “driven by reasons of a personal nature”. Hence the dismissal, decided with the approval of the Coni General Prosecutor’s Office for Sport, chaired by Ugo Taucer, who could have taken the investigation on himself if he had not deemed it appropriate. If Abodi takes issue with federal justice, he should therefore broaden the scope to include CONI. Of the alleged “combined” appointments of Rocchi which the Milanese prosecutors are investigating, the FIGC Prosecutor’s Office never knew anything until yesterday morning and Chinè immediately requested the documents. Once he has them in hand, a new investigation into the self-suspended designator will begin. Elements that need to be clarified, given that after the minister’s post the shadow of the “cover-up” quickly spread among the media and fans.

commissioner

—

And we arrive at the third and final part of Abodi’s message: “I therefore expect to formally receive information from CONI regarding the matter as soon as possible. In the event that responsibilities are ascertained, there cannot fail to be consequences”. A closure which, given the moment and the words previously spoken by the minister on the subject, can only be read as a new impetus towards a commissionership. A hypothesis that was very popular immediately after the flop of our national team in Bosnia, but which the president of CONI Luciano Buonfiglio, the only one entitled to act on this front, had always returned to the sender: “At the moment there are no conditions”. Abodi himself had recently declared that he “did not want to force his hand”, preferring alternative paths, so much so that he was even considering the idea of ​​a decree.

scenarios

—

The Rocchi case can change scenarios, with an important impact also on the elections of the future FIGC president scheduled for June 22nd. Among the criteria for which, according to the Coni Statute, a federation can be placed under commissionership there are also “serious violations of the sporting order by the governing bodies”. And it is on this point that we will most likely want to leverage. But two observations need to be made: at the moment the “serious violations” of which Rocchi is accused are not ascertained and Rocchi himself is not part of the governing bodies of the FIGC. What could happen (beyond the outcome of Zappi’s trial) is a commissionership in The Hague, which could also be done by the resigning president Gabriele Gravina, who is allowed to act for so-called non-deferrable acts. That’s not all. A commissionership (which is proposed by the CONI Board to the National Council), if deemed illegitimate because it lacks the conditions to implement it, can be challenged. It is therefore not excluded that if this were to be the path, President Gravina could appeal, first to the Sport Guarantee Board at CONI, then possibly to the Lazio Regional Administrative Court and to the Council of State. There is a recent precedent: in 2018 the six-month extension of Fabbricini’s commissionership was challenged in the FIGC. The Board of Guarantee chaired by Frattini in united sections decided that the extension in question was illegitimate and in October they went to vote (and Gravina won). The person who challenged it on behalf of Cosimo Sibilia was the lawyer Giancarlo Viglione, now a lawyer for the FIGC. Having said that, if the hypothetical and much discussed commissionership were to be judged illegitimate, Buonfiglio would come out badly and would be forced to take a step back. But they are just scenarios. For now.