The Supreme Court’s Contested-Administrative Division met this week and reached a ruling related to the impeachment case that United States-based and Canadian readers might recall from the 2017 era of Spanish football governance. The decision, as cited by El Periódico de España in its legal briefings, concerns a sentence that would determine the fate of the former president in 2017 regarding the leadership of the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) and the actions of its executives. The case was overseen by the Sports Administrative Court (TAD), which classified the conduct as a very serious error connected to the federation’s 2017 selection process.
At that time, Villar was already entangled in the Soule case, a sequence of events that involved the National Supreme Court issuing orders over alleged mismanagement within the Federation. The investigation precipitated Villar and his son Gorka into short-term preventive detention during the 2017 summer, followed by bail payments of 300,000 and 150,000 euros, after which they were separated. The sources consulted indicate that the Fourth Disputed Chamber of the Supreme Court debated a point inside sports regulations about dismissals when a party’s duplicative condition is not met, provided the acts are deemed very serious in nature.
Article 76.2 of the Sporting Law is cited to describe breaches committed by leaders and other executive figures within the national federations and professional leagues. The statute lists failures such as ignoring general assembly decisions, violations of election regulations, and breaches of other legal or regulatory provisions.
Villar’s appeal to reopen the case was accepted in January, challenging a prior Madrid Supreme Court of Justice (TSJM) ruling that had upheld the TAD’s December 2017 decision. The Supreme Sports Council’s role is characterized as subordinate to the Government, aligning with the existing sports governance framework in Spain.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision aligns with ongoing investigations by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, which is examining the current RFEF president, Luis Rubiales, for potential irregularities in federation management. The Prosecutor’s Office is also scrutinizing the federation and the Kosmos Global Holding SL, the company associated with FC Barcelona star Gerard Piqué, regarding sponsorship and contract arrangements tied to the Spanish Super Cup matches held in Saudi Arabia, raising questions about potential corruption and biased management in the sporting world.
In Villar’s appeal, now under review by the Supreme Court, he argues that the rule explicitly excludes the sanction for recidivism, emphasizing that the case has a matter-of-record objective interest and warrants consideration.
The TAD’s ruling held that Villar failed to comply with the Election Regulations (clause 4.4) by allowing candidacies for governance positions in the RFEF to proceed even if certain candidates could not serve on the Management Commission, effectively setting their terms to expire once the nomination presented itself.
Duty of impartiality
The court also found that Villar violated the duty of impartiality. The Board of Directors must adhere to the Election Regulation, which contemplates expulsion penalties under Article 79 of the Sports Law.
In its examination, the TSJM concluded that Villar’s guilt was evident, noting that his role as chair of the RFEF’s Steering Committee obliged him to maintain a strict, objective stance during the selection process. The documents in the record demonstrated that he leveraged his presidency to influence re-election campaigns while acting as president of the federation.
The discussion also turns to whether the “aggravating recidivism” clause should be interpreted in light of the constitutional principle of legality enshrined in Article 25 of the Spanish Constitution, and whether it is necessary to apply the expulsion penalty prescribed by sports law.
The Soule case continues
The Soule case centers on alleged irregularities by top federation leaders or those acting with their knowledge and consent, purportedly to enrich themselves or third parties. A network of companies is said to have formed, enabling funds to be shifted—both public and private—toward entities tied to the associations themselves.
These allegations describe potential crimes including mismanagement, abuse, fraud, diversion of public funds, forged documents, and acts of corruption involving individuals and fiscal authorities.
A recent development occurred when the General Government Intervention (IGAE) alerted a judge to various irregularities in the construction and maintenance of several football facilities in Spain, according to Europa Press reports.