TAS 2023 A 9751 Manuel Burga Seoane c. FIFA ES
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 20 Feb 2025
Why it matters
This award is significant because it confirms FIFA's broad disciplinary power over football officials even after a criminal acquittal in the US. It sets a precedent that the standard of proof in FIFA ethics cases is lower than in criminal law, and that circumstantial evidence and witness testimony from cooperating witnesses can suffice. The case also underscores CAS's deference to FIFA's internal procedures when due process is respected.
Summary
Manuel Burga, former president of the Peruvian Football Federation (FPF) and member of CONMEBOL's Executive Committee, was accused of accepting bribes from sports marketing companies (Full Play, T&T, Datisa) in exchange for supporting contracts for broadcasting rights of CONMEBOL tournaments (Copa Libertadores, Copa Sudamericana, Copa América). In 2015, US authorities indicted him for racketeering, wire fraud, and money laundering. He was extradited to the US but acquitted by a jury in 2017 on the sole charge of conspiracy to commit racketeering. Meanwhile, FIFA's Ethics Committee investigated and, in 2019, imposed a life ban and CHF 1,000,000 fine for bribery. Burga appealed to CAS, which annulled the decision due to procedural defects (lack of proper notification). FIFA reopened the investigation, and in 2023 the Adjudicatory Chamber again imposed a life ban and fine. Burga appealed to CAS, arguing that the evidence was insufficient, that his right to a fair hearing was violated because he could not cross-examine witnesses, and that the FIFA Ethics Committee lacked impartiality. CAS dismissed the appeal, holding that the standard of proof in FIFA disciplinary proceedings is 'comfortable satisfaction,' which is lower than 'beyond reasonable doubt.' The panel found that the evidence, including testimony from cooperating witnesses (Burzaco, Bedoya, Peña, Rodríguez) and documentary records, collectively demonstrated that Burga accepted bribes. The panel noted that corruption is inherently secret and that circumstantial evidence can be sufficient. It also rejected the impartiality challenge, finding that the involvement of the same adjudicator who had decided the earlier case did not violate due process because the second proceeding was a fresh investigation. CAS confirmed the life ban and fine, and ordered Burga to pay CHF 2,000 towards FIFA's costs.
The detail
Parties: TAS 2023 A 9751 Manuel Burga Seoane c. FIFA ES
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; CAS confirmed FIFA's life ban and CHF 1,000,000 fine for bribery and corruption.
Quantum: CHF 1,000,000 fine
Applicable law: FIFA Code of Ethics (2012 edition), Articles 13, 15, 19, 20, 21; CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration
Issues in play: The case involved the standard of proof for corruption in sports disciplinary proceedings, and whether FIFA's ethics bodies violated the appellant's right to a fair hearing and impartiality.
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.