Fifteen penalty points. It is the sensational sting decided by the Federal Court of Appeals from the Figc against Juventus for the “capital gains case“: a sanction that goes far beyond that requested by the prosecutor Giuseppe Chine, which stopped at nine points. The sports judges have decided to reopen the proceeding concluded on 27 May with theabsolution of nine clubs from the charge of having made fictitious capital gains. But only against the black and white club: Sampdoria, Empoli, Genoa, Parma, Pisa, Pescara, Pro Vercelli and the “old” Novara, in fact, have been acquitted. The federal prosecutor had requested the partial revocation of that sentence on the basis of “new evidence“: i.e. the deeds, arrived from Turin, relating to thePrisma investigationthat sees Andrea Agnelli and the former leaders of the Juventus accused on charges (among others) of false accounting. The penalty has immediate effect, without prejudice to the possibility for the Turin club to do appeal – within thirty days of the publication of the reasons – to the Coni Guarantee Board. Therefore the bianconeri go down from 37 to 22 points in the Serie A standings, falling from third to tenth placeon a par with Empoli and Bologna, very far from the placements that lead to qualifying for the European cups.
The hearing began just before 1pm on Friday and it is concluded around 5 pm, while the verdict arrived at 9 pm. In addition to the penalty, the Court presided over by Mario Luigi Torsello imposed an inhibition from carrying out activities within the FIGC (with a request to extend it to UEFA and FIFA) for two years and a half to the former Juventus sporting director Fabio Paraticifor two years to the former president Andrea Agnelli and to the former board member Maurice Arrivabenefor one year and four months to the current ds Federico Cherubini and for eight months to Pavel Nedved, former vice president of the club. Also in this respect the judges were stricter than the Public Prosecutor’s Office: the request was 16 months for Agnelli, twenty months and ten days for Paratici, ten months for Cherubini, 12 months for Nedved and Arrivabene. Against the other companies involved, however, simple fines had been requested. In parallel with the capital gains case, the trend on the so-called “wage maneuvers“, the private agreements with the players that Juve signed in the 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons, according to the Turin prosecutors to distort the balance sheets: in this respect the sporting procedure starts from scratch and soon the prosecutor Chinè could ask for the referral of the company and its directors. The old Juventus board of directors had resigned en bloc at the end of November, immediately before the request for indictment.
TO follow the hearing the new president of Juventus was also connected from Turin, Gianluca Ferrero. In addition to the lawyers, sporting director Cherubini was present. Also connected Paratici, now manager of Tottenham. The Juventus club has deposited a memory defensivewith the positions already expressed and reaffirmed: appeal “inadmissibledue to the absence, in the case in question, of the application conditions of this extraordinary remedy”, i.e. of “facts new“, according to the principle according to which “no one can be prosecuted or convicted under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offense for which he is already been acquitted or convicted following a final judgment in accordance with the law and criminal procedure of that State” (ne bis in idem). “This prohibition”, the memorandum argued, “constitutes a fundamental principle of the Italian legal order, as recognized by the Constitutional Court, which, as known, has fully implemented the interpretative indications on the matter coming from the European Courts”. The lawyers Mauritius Beautiful thing, David St. George And Nicholas Apa they admitted that according to “the orientation of sports jurisprudence (…), the institute of revocation pursuant to art. 63 of the Sports Justice Code, would not violate the prohibition of bis in ditto nor would it be incompatible with the Coni Code of Justice”. But they asked the judges to engage in “a renewed and thorough reflection on the subject”, overcoming that interpretation.
#Capital #gains #sting #Juventus #penalty #points #decision #FIGC #Court #Appeal #request #prosecution #Fatto #Quotidiano