TAS 2022 A 9175 FPF c. FEF & FIFA & TAS 2022 A 9176 FFC c. FEF, Castillo & FIFA
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 18 Apr 2023
Why it matters
This case is a landmark for clarifying the distinction between legal and sporting nationality in football, emphasizing that while national courts determine legal nationality, sports bodies like CAS can assess 'sporting nationality' based on their own rules. It highlights the strict application of anti-falsification rules in international football, even when national documents are deemed authentic, and sets a precedent for sanctions related to the use of documents with 'intellectual falsification' in player eligibility disputes.
Summary
The case involved appeals by the Peruvian and Chilean Football Federations (FPF and FFC) against a FIFA Appeal Committee decision that cleared the Ecuadorian Football Federation (FEF) of wrongdoing regarding player Byron Castillo's eligibility for the FIFA World Cup 2022 qualifiers. The FPF and FFC alleged that Castillo was Colombian, not Ecuadorian, and had used falsified documents. The background revealed a complex history: Castillo was registered in Ecuador in 2012, but investigations by the Ecuadorian Civil Registry in 2015 and 2018 raised suspicions of 'double identity, adulteration of nationality and age,' with one report concluding his Ecuadorian birth registration was 'forged.' An audio recording from an interview with Colonel Jaime Jara (Head of FEF Investigations Commission) surfaced, in which Castillo allegedly admitted to being born in Tumaco, Colombia, in 1995 (not Ecuador in 1998) and having falsified his age and nationality. Ecuadorian courts later issued judgments (Protective Action and Habeas Data Action) confirming Castillo's Ecuadorian nationality and ordering his ID to be unblocked, which the FEF relied upon. The CAS Panel, sitting in Lausanne, Switzerland, had jurisdiction over the dispute, including matters of forgery/falsification and sporting nationality, distinct from legal nationality. The Panel found the audio recording admissible and reliable, concluding that Castillo had indeed admitted to being born in Colombia in 1995. After a thorough analysis of evidence, including the Colombian birth certificate and baptism certificate, the Panel was 'comfortably satisfied' that Castillo was born in Tumaco, Colombia, on 25 June 1995, and that his Ecuadorian passport contained 'false information' ('faux intellectuel') regarding his name, date, and place of birth. However, the Panel distinguished between Article 21 FDC (forgery and falsification) and Article 22 FDC (ineligible player). While the FEF was found liable under Article 21 FDC for using a document with false information, it was *not* found to have breached Article 22 FDC because, at the time of the matches, Castillo held Ecuadorian legal nationality based on Ecuadorian court decisions and a valid passport. FIFA rules, the Panel noted, bind it to the legal nationality granted by a sovereign state for eligibility purposes. Therefore, Castillo was considered eligible to play for Ecuador under FIFA's rules. As a sanction for the breach of Article 21 FDC, the CAS imposed a 3-point deduction on the FEF in the *next* edition of the FIFA World Cup preliminary competition (not the current one, as the competition had concluded and Castillo was deemed eligible at the time), a fine of CHF 100,000 to FIFA, and ordered the FEF to pay CHF 10,000 each to the FPF and FFC for their legal expenses. The Player himself was deemed to lack standing to be sued in this CAS proceeding.
The detail
Parties: TAS 2022 A 9175 FPF c. FEF & FIFA & TAS 2022 A 9176 FFC c. FEF, Castillo & FIFA
Outcome: The Court of Arbitration for Sport partially upheld the appeals, finding the Ecuadorian Football Federation (FEF) liable for using a document with false information regarding player Byron Castillo. The FEF was sanctioned with a 3-point deduction in the next World Cup qualifiers, a CHF 100,000 fine to FIFA, and ordered to pay CHF 10,000 each to the Peruvian and Chilean Football Federations for their legal expenses.
Quantum: CHF 100,000 fine to FIFA, plus CHF 10,000 each to FPF and FFC.
Applicable law: FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC), FIFA Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes (RGAS), FIFA World Cup Preliminary Competition Regulations, CAS Code, Swiss Federal Private International Law Act (PILA), Swiss Civil Code (SCC), Swiss Criminal Code (CP), Swiss Code of Obligations (SCO).
Issues in play: The core legal conflict revolved around the distinction between 'legal nationality' (as determined by Ecuadorian courts) and 'sporting nationality' (as defined by FIFA rules). The case also applied Swiss law principles of 'falsified document' (faux intellectuel) to determine if the player's Ecuadorian passport, though authentic, contained false information regarding his birth details, thereby breaching FIFA's disciplinary code on forgery and falsification.
Read the full decision at Court of Arbitration for Sport (football, via FIFA) ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.