Capital gains, FIGC appeal: Juve and the other 8, risk of penalty

It’s the day of – first – judgement. Today we will discover the real effects of the Prisma investigation on Juventus from a sporting point of view. At 12.30, before the Federal Court of Appeal in joint sections, we return to talk about capital gains and the judges’ ruling is expected during the day. In practice, by tonight we will know if the bianconeri will see their first and second degree acquittals confirmed without a new trial, if they will be tried again and still considered innocent or if they will receive a sentence that could have an important impact also in terms of points in ranking.

As known, on December 22nd the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office presented an application for revocation of the acquittal sentence that the Court had issued on May 27th against the Bianconeri and the other clubs involved in the first trial on the alleged fictitious capital gains. An exceptional procedure, possible (for art. 63 of the Sports Justice Code) if “new elements of proof emerge that demonstrate the existence of the offences”. The chief prosecutor Chiné is convinced that in the 14,000 pages of Prisma there are “numerous serious indications capable of modifying the final decision”, in particular telephone and environmental interceptions, digital and non-digital documents, which “demonstrate the existence of a system, of a budget planning for the sale of players carried out not for technical reasons but for reasons exclusively connected to achieving certain economic-financial results through artifice”.

From this the prosecutor will start this morning in the hearing (remotely) and after having justified the admissibility of his appeal, he will immediately proceed to request sanctions for Juve, the other eight clubs (Samp, Empoli, Genoa, Parma, Pisa, breaking latest news, Pro Vercelli and the old Novara) and the 52 managers or former managers including Agnelli, Nedved, Arrivabene and Cherubini. Attention: it is not written anywhere that the requests for sanctions must be similar to those made in the first trial. At the time Chiné had asked for fines for the clubs (800,000 euros for Juve) and inhibitions for the managers (12 months for Agnelli, 16 and 10 days for Paratici). In the application for revocation, the prosecutor did not express his intentions regarding the penalties to be requested. It could remain on those already formulated, but – in the light of the new elements collected thanks to Prisma – it could go further. The article that defines the violations in managerial and economic matters is 31 of the Sports Justice Code which provides for the penalty of points (and even relegation) in the event that it is demonstrated that the offense has allowed the registration to the championship ( paragraph 2). But in paragraph 1, which deals with administrative violations unrelated to obtaining licenses, we read that the sanction is the fine with warning “save for the application of the most serious sanctions that can be imposed for the other facts envisaged by this article” . Given the evident difficulty of demonstrating that the capital gains have led to an otherwise impossible registration (the problem of how the real value of a player can be defined again), this is the regulatory element which, if the Public Prosecutor’s Office considers the new probative elements particularly serious, could still lead to the request for penalty points.

Going back to what will happen on today’s crucial day, the club lawyers – starting with that of Juve who have already filed their statement – will illustrate their defensive strategy, therefore (unless the interventions last for hours but it is really difficult) the Court still presided over by Judge Torsello will meet in chambers and during the day will make its decision first of all on the admissibility of the application presented by the federal prosecutor, then, if this is accepted, will decide on the merits. Juve and the other clubs could still be acquitted again, otherwise the sentence for the club and managers will be known. If it really were penalty points, the decision would become enforceable immediately, but the club could still appeal to the Coni guarantee college.