The key mistake in the Chilean complaint against Byron Castillo that FIFA did not forgive the Reds

This Friday, Chile opened the day with a festive tone. There were not a few who attended their respective works dressed in national team jerseys. Even television programming began to focus on what would happen a few hours later in Zurich, the Swiss city that hosts FIFA. ‘Chileno de corazón’, the song by the group Mala Junta, was heard again with almost the same intensity as when it debuted in 1998. Even the clothes of the time came to the fore. Many thought La Roja would qualify for the World Cup in Qatar. Administratively, formally. “Through the window”, in the most footballing language. Almost everyone didn’t care.

However, a few hours later, everything fell apart. In two paragraphs of a few lines each, the entity chaired by Gianni Infantino indicated that the Chilean complaint regarding the eligibility of defender Byron Castillo by Ecuador had been rejected. Therefore, the team led by Gustavo Alfaro has been ratified as one of the 32 participants in the tournament to be played in Qatar. The face has changed and Eduardo Carlezzo, the Brazilian lawyer who earlier last week monopolized stares and applause for what appeared to be a tough public presentation, is now at the center of criticism.

In the absence of FIFA delivering the reasons for the resolution, the whole country is trying to explain why a position that seemed so convincing ended up succumbing in the first instance of world football justice. “It seems to me that FIFA will never question a document issued by a court or a judicial body of the country of a member federation. Therefore, if the falsity alleged by Chile is based on the existence of a prior certificate, the possibilities are significantly reduced.. The only way to counter this is to provide new evidence, but I do not see what evidence could exist to disarm a final court decision, ”observed lawyer Francisco Moya in the edition of La Tercera Domingo, reporting d an element that Ecuador had highlighted. “Falsification of documents is somewhat difficult to prove, despite the certificates and declarations provided. The defense must try to concentrate on an alteration which comes from the player and/or the federation and not on the validity of the documents delivered, for example, by the civil status or the courts of justice.“, added his colleague, Mauricio Ríos.

Indeed, according to this interpretation, the error is at the center of the offensive, which calls into question the nationality of Castillo, an aspect that the Ecuadorian justice and even the civil registry of this country had settled. World football’s governing body, insofar as it does not allow disputes inherent in the activity to be resolved by ordinary courts, generally respects the formal decisions of courts or organizations operating in its member countries. Therefore, if the government authorities of Ecuador had already decided that the Barcelona side of Guayaquil is an Ecuadorian citizen, for FIFA there is no way around it.

Byron Castillo celebrated - with this photo - FIFA's decision.
The image with which Byron Castillo celebrated FIFA’s decision (Photo: Byron Castillo’s Instagram)

It is, strictly speaking, the base of the Ecuadorian defence, signs of which are only just beginning to emerge. An approach that, as if it were a football match, has also been carefully considered. Indeed, the federation chaired by Francisco Egas, like that chaired by Pablo Milad intended to do so, was advised by renowned specialists in sports law. Argentinian Gonzalo Mayo and Spaniard Javier Ferrero supported the work of local Celso Vásconez. They all have a great experience in this type of competition.

In Ecuador, as in Chile, they are eagerly waiting for FIFA to lay out the details of the decision. It is estimated that the response could take up to 20 days. However, the elements that the FEF has managed to put on the table are gradually transcending each other. And this is where the more technical explanation comes in: the lack of legitimacy and the inadmissibility concerning the falsification of documents is pointed out. This explains, for example, that in its offensive after the notice, Egas pointed out that they were studying legal actions against Chile. And, in turn, that Manzur argues that One of the options considered is not to accept the abbreviated procedure that the CAS can only instruct with the agreement of the parties in dispute..

The final consideration is a chess-worthy move. Under normal conditions, the procedure would never end before the World Cup. Same if Ecuador accepted a more summarized process, it is estimated that the deadlines would be just as tight, given that the kick-off in Qatar, precisely with the yellow representative as the protagonist against the host, will take place in November.

In legal sources, they point out that the lack of legitimacy of the arguments is very unlikely to be reversed, at least before the FIFA Appeals Chamber. This is why the bet must focus on an almost irreproachable presentation before the court working in Lausanne. And even there, it is considered difficult to impose.

The variable that it is purely and simply rejected, and that it could also have signified an unfavorable decision, even if it did not rule on the merits, it is that the request was considered to be time-barred.

#key #mistake #Chilean #complaint #Byron #Castillo #FIFA #forgive #Reds

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.