National Court authorities are scrutinizing actions by the government through the Supreme Sports Council, with calls for accountability dating back more than a year and a half. The body led by José Manuel Franco faced demands to file formal complaints with the Sports Administrative Court over alleged irregularities by the former president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF). These concerns were based on audio records and documents tied to the Super Cup case, raising questions about the handling of disciplinary matters within the federation.
The news, reported by Iusport and confirmed by this publication, aligns with decisions in LaLiga’s favor. LaLiga had lodged a contentious administrative appeal against the CSD’s ruling issued on September 9, 2022. After a Majadahonda court processed several complaints against Rubiales, the government chose not to forward the administrative complaints it had received to the TAD in light of developments surrounding the Super Cup case.
Jenni Hermoso, prior to the Prosecutor’s Office, commented on the Rubiales case: “The kiss was not consensual, I did not feel respected.”
Drafting
The decision challenges the lawfulness of the government’s actions. The government argued that ordinary-justice proceedings compelled a pause in the administrative process until a ruling was reached. The National Court, however, found that the cited decision did not comply with legal standards and warned that the government’s delay could affect the statute of limitations for certain administrative offenses investigated by LaLiga and allegedly committed by Rubiales.
The judge also supported Pablo Álvarez, noting that some reported offenses may be administrative in nature rather than criminal, which would not justify suspending the sports disciplinary procedure for those incidents.
Reasons for the complaint against Rubiales
The allegations cited by LaLiga included suspected corruption tied to the Spanish Football Super Cup held in Saudi Arabia, the housing rent payments by the RFEF for the RFEF president, and alleged irregularities in the president’s trips to New York between October 31 and November 14, 2018. There were also claims about hiring detectives to monitor court proceedings via Cryptex Europa and perceived irregularities in procedures, along with issues around vacancies in the Second Division B tied to Reus CF’s administrative relegation.
The court underscored the government’s obligation to present to the TAB the documents submitted against Rubiales on June 13 and July 1 of the previous year. It is anticipated that these actions will not yield immediate effects, as TAB procedures would need to pause some complaints that are within the purview of ordinary-court decisions. The critical distinction is that deadlines to explain Rubiales’ alleged offenses were paused, meaning that even if months or years pass before a judge makes a decision, prescription would not apply to those cases.
TAB’s decision about Rubiales
These complaints to the TAB would complement the earlier complaint filed by the CSD regarding the events surrounding the Women’s World Cup final. The government pressed the TAB to classify these issues as very serious to enable a temporary suspension, yet the court restricted TAB authority significantly.
The administration then sought TAB activation of the necessary mechanisms for a temporary suspension. Rubiales’ resignation was discussed, but the process was blocked as the aim remained to keep him away from the RFEF presidency, despite FIFA’s 90-day provisional restraining order issued six days after the events.
The evolving legal narrative centers on whether administrative inquiries can proceed in parallel with ordinary-justice investigations, and whether timely action could have altered the governance dynamics within the federation. The decisions reflect a tense interplay between sports governance and national judicial oversight, with potential long-term consequences for accountability in top-level football administration.