Turin, May 10 2010All'Ill. Mo Prime CONIAll'Ill. Mo FIGCAlla Ecc.ma President of Procura At the Federal FIGCAtt.ne of the Ill. Mo EXPOSED Chief Federal Prosecutor for Juventus Football Club SpA
Juventus FC SpA based in Turin, Corso Galileo Ferraris n. 32, in the person of its chairman and CEO Jean-Claude Blanc and represented and assisted by the lawyer Michael Briamonte Studio Grande Stevens and by the lawyer. Luigi Chiappero member states as segue.La Company intends to state that it does not intend in any way depart from its usual attitude of respect and deference to the strict rules of sports justice (and apply them), in line with its prestigious history has shown compliance with the spirit of respect and common affiliation. The realization that the sports movement is based and is based on loyalty between - and against de - affiliates, as well as on a fair and equal treatment, leads the company representative to review the following considerations to Their Lordships, which respects the request of Justice.
1. On July 26, 2006 Dear MISUSE Italian Football Federation, by application of the Extraordinary Mr. Guido Rossi of Milan, issued the following statement which he gave the note of the decisions taken: "The Football Federation received on 24 July 2006 Advisory Opinion of the Commission composed of Gerhard Aigner, Massimo Coccia and Roberto Pardolesi on questions regarding the award of Champion d ' Italy in case of change in the final standings of the championship. The Commission concluded that, if the mere withdrawal of the title of champion of Italy without changing the classification, the title remains vacant necessarily. Otherwise, in case of sanctions that will change in classification (such as penalty points or relegated to last place), art. 49 of NOIF provides for the automatic acquisition of the Italian championship for the team that is ranked first, subject to the sanctions. The federal agencies may, however, intervene with a specific decision not to give reasons when making use of reason and ethics of sports, such as when you make realize that the deficiencies are the number and scale in order to distort the entire league that teams are not penalized or have behaved in very clear. The Special Commissioner has decided to follow the conclusions of that opinion and do not use reason for the adoption of measures not to award the title of Champion of Italy for the 2005-2006 season the team ranked first outcome of the disciplinary reviews. It remains vacant as the champion of Italy 2004-2005. The FIGC
sent today to the new classification of the UEFA Cup Italian Serie A 2005/2006-complete list of supporting documentation, the teams enter the Champions League and the Cup UEFA. Per la Champions League Inter, Roma , Milan, Chievo. Per la Coppa UEFA Palermo , Livorno, Parma.».
2. Il presupposto per l’adozione della decisione de qua fu quindi quella della inesistenza di «comportamenti poco limpidi» addebitabili alla «squadra che risulta[ò] prima classificata» all’esito della penalizzazione inflitta con decisione della Corte d’Appello Federale il 25 luglio 2006 (la Società Internazionale F.C.).
3. Al fine di meglio illustrare le ragioni alla base del presente esposto, la Società ritiene opportuno richiamare le violazioni contestate dal Signor Procuratore Federale, dott. Stefano Palazzi, con atti di deferimento notificati alla Juventus FC SpA and three other affiliates (AC Milan, AC Fiorentina and SS Lazio), then violations made by the bodies of Sports Justice, with the issuing of sentences of exemplary damages to the Company afflittività exponent. The disputes below are taken from the decision of the Federal Commission of Appeals, which met to deliberate under the chairmanship of Dr. Cesare Ruperto July 7, 2006: "The act of referral, as noted above, the federal prosecutor starts from June 19, 2006 No report 62 2005 - 2006 Office investigations, supplemented by documents relating to criminal proceedings No 43915/02 RG Prosecutor's Office in writing - at the DDA Court of Naples, in accordance with Art. 2, paragraph 3, L. No 401, 1989, had passed on, along with information of the core operating Rome Carabinieri Lazio Region, several transcripts of telephone intercepts, interrogation of suspects and further acts of investigation, some of which specifically mentioned. Making explicit reference to the general report prepared by the investigation, the federal prosecutor noted that the intercepted conversations and the activity of stalking emerged frequent contacts and meetings between company executives sports leaders FIGC designated arbitral referees and assistant referees, as well as journalists, players' agents and employees federal, confirming the fact that they had woven a dense and stable network of contacts. About
pipeline allegedly aimed at altering the principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence of the sector tribunal, the federal prosecutor party report of its findings carried out in relation to certain races were interested in sports clubs Juventus, Fiorentina, Lazio and Milan, as well as below. A) Juventus FC SpaValenza specification is attributed to the frequency of contacts and building relationships between Moggi, Giraudo on, the referee designators Bergamo and Pairetto, the president of the AIA, Lanese, the international referee De Santis, as well as former clerical staff CAN FGM, and the vice president of FlGC Mazzini investigation would emerge as the organization of several private dinners, held in private homes of the guests, away from prying eyes and how not designed to advertise the meetings themselves.
Emerge as a whole, the documents, according to the federal prosecutor, the existence of an established network of relationships, not regulatory in nature, intended to alter the principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence of the arbitration.
that objective was pursued through various pipelines, which intervened in time and at different levels, including: Moggi and Giraudo relationships with leading figures in the field of arbitration, such as Bergamo and Pairetto Lanese and the referee De Santis, full agreement among those in the pipeline system be put in place, vice president of federal intervention Mazzini intervention Moggi in the preparation of the 'grid' used for the description of the arbitrators competition by Moggi in the choice of assistants for each event, conditioning the power granted to the designators to suspend the use of referees and assistants as a result of incorrect technical decisions; [...].
From the point of view of discipline, according to federal prosecutors, respectively entered into the conduct of: Luciano Moggi, Antonio Giraudo, Innocenzo Mazzini, Paolo Bergamo and Pierluigi Pairetto, Tullio Lanese and Massimo De Santis, are in violation of the principles of loyalty, honesty and fairness enshrined in Article. 1, paragraph 1, CGS (Chapter 1) and, as directed to provide an advantage in the standings to the company Juventus by the conditioning of the regular functioning of the arbitration, including breach of Article. 6, paragraphs 1 and 2, CGS which combines the direct responsibility of the company and alleged Juventus, under Articles. 6, 9, paragraph 3, and 2, paragraph 4, CGS (head n 2), as ascribed to their leaders on the one hand with legal representation and other subjects non tesserati per la essa società; con l’aggravante di cui al comma 6 dell’art. 6 C.G.S., in considerazione della pluralità di condotte poste in essere e del conseguimento del vantaggio in classifica ottenuto con le descritte modalità di condizionamento. […] Al Moggi la Procura federale contesta anche l’illecito sportivo di cui all’art. 6 comma 1, prima parte, C.G.S. per aver conosciuto i nomi degli assistenti di gara prima ancora della loro ufficiale designazione quanto alla gara Juventus – Lazio del 5 dicembre 2004 e per essere intervenuto sull’arbitro De Santis rispetto alla gara Fiorentina – Bologna del 5 dicembre 2004, affinché ne uscisse indebolito l’organico del Bologna in vista the next game against Juventus (nn leaders. 7 and 9). Under Chapter No 7 to Moggi is also formally charged the violation of art. 1, paragraph 1, CGS, in terms dictated by telephone that the Bergamo
exponent (call to respond to liability of an agent of action) capable of showing the absence of the assumption of the decision taken out by this Dear Italian Football Federation, by application of the Commissioner Extraordinary Mr. Guido Rossi in Milan, announced July 26, 2006: the non-existence, namely, the "absence of dubious conduct" occurred due to the "team that is [or] first classified" the outcome of the criminalization of the others.
4. In particular, there was a dense network of contacts in Annex 1 to this display (taken from document production before the Court cited Naples) between representatives of the companies benefiting from the desk of the Scudetto 2005-2006, do not blame in cases of 2006, and the gentlemen enrolled Bergamo, Pairetto, De Santis, Mazzei. Borrowing what is written in the referral, this is "relationship [..] With leading figures in the field of arbitration, such as Bergamo, Pairetto [...] and with the referee De Santis, "which are the same kind and quality as those attributed to the directors of the Company illo tempore exponent, as well as under the Legally, they are exactly, again borrowing the words used in the referral of the member companies' violation of the principles of loyalty, honesty and fairness enshrined in Article. 1, paragraph 1, CGS (Chapter 1) and, as directed to provide an advantage in the standings to the company [..] with the conditioning of the regular functioning of the arbitration, including breach of Article. 6, commi 1 e 2, C.G.S. cui si abbina la responsabilità diretta e presunta della società [..], ai sensi degli artt. 6, 9, comma 3, e 2, comma 4, C.G.S. (capo n 2), per quanto ascritto da un lato ai suoi dirigenti con legale rappresentanza e dall’altro a soggetti non tesserati per la essa società; con l’aggravante di cui al comma 6 dell’art. 6 C.G.S., in considerazione della pluralità di condotte poste in essere e del conseguimento del vantaggio in classifica ottenuto con le descritte modalità di condizionamento”.
5. È dunque evidente, ad avviso della società esponente, che non sussiste il presupposto della “assenza dei comportamenti poco limpidi” che ha (erroneamente) indotto all’assunzione della decisione di assegnazione del titolo di campione d’Italia 2005/2006 alla società prima classificata all’esito delle penalizzazioni delle altre.
La Società esponente ha dunque ragione di ritenere che risponda a Giustizia e Equità la revisione da parte di codesta Spett.le Federazione della citata decisione del 26 luglio 2006 alla luce del materiale probatorio recentemente emerso e già acquisito al tempo dell’indagine,e pertanto rispettosamente si rivolge alle Eccellenze Loro affinché vogliano, ciascuna nell’ambito dei poteri assegnati dall’Ordinamento revocare la decisione assunta da codesta Spett.le Federazione Italiana Giuoco Calcio, con atto del Commissario Straordinario Avv. Guido Rossi di Milano, comunicata il 26 luglio 2006, con ogni consequenziale pronuncia ripristinatoria dello status quo ante e deferire ai sensi dell’art. 32 comma 4 del Codice di Giustizia Sportiva (CGS) al giudizio della competente autorità disciplinare tutti i tesserati e le Società, al titolo di responsabilità che a ciascuna pertiene, coinvolti nei comportamenti antisportivi sopra esposti ed emersi in margine al procedimento penale n. 43915/02 R.G. iscritto nella Procura della Repubblica – D.D.A. presso il Tribunale di Napoli disponendo l’Ecc.ma Procura Federale le attività di indagine che riterrà del caso, con richiesta della Società esponente Juventus F.C. S.p.A. di essere notiziata dell’esito delle indagini presso il domicilio qui eletto presso l’Avvocato Michele Briamonte, Studio Legale Grande Stevens di Torino, Via del Carmine, n. 2, con salvezza di ogni ulteriore azione e diritto, nonché di ulteriormente produrre e dedurre a supporto del presente esposto.
Torino, 10 maggio 2010
Con ossequio, Jean-Claude Blanc
- Avvocato Michele Briamonte -
Articolo di Daniele Galosso su www.j1897news.com
