It is rare to find a good answer to a badly asked question. And this is unfortunately the situation in which the French Football Federation (FFF) has put itself to deal with the reform of its governance. This reform is, of course, imposed by the legislator, since it is the law of March 2, 2022 which guides it. This piece of legislation is, of course, imperfect. But it constitutes a formidable invitation for the federations to breathe more democracy and transparency into their functioning. And it opens up a real opportunity for the sports movement to get closer to its base.
This is far from negligible in a context of mistrust, fueled, it must be remembered, by repeated institutional crises which give a very poor image of French sport. A window is therefore open, all the more salutary in the case of the FFF, singled out recently, in a ministerial audit, for the lack of pluralism of its bodies, the concentration of powers and the erasure of its control authorities. These are all subjects that should be at the heart of this reform.
However, the FFF seems to have made a completely different choice, that of approaching this reform as a subject of ” compliance “ with the law. In other words, the objective would be to translate it in the most restrictive way possible, while preserving everything that can be saved from the current model.
Read the decryption: Article reserved for our FFF subscribers: pressure intensifies on Noël Le Graët after an overwhelming audit
Since it is required to allow clubs to join the Federal Assembly, the FFF chooses to do so by limiting their influence as much as possible. Clubs must vote for the election of the president because the law requires it? They will therefore vote on this sole occasion, since the law allows it. Even if it makes no sense, the clubs will therefore, in this new system, be excluded from the assembly when it comes to voting on budgets, regulations, federal policies, all subjects that concern them. first and foremost. In short : “Vote for me, then shut up. »
Rescue of a model in crisis
The disturbing impression that emerges from the proposed reform is that it stems from no reflection on what democratic and transparent federal governance should be, but only from an attempt to save a model in crisis. The opening of the executive committee to opposition to strengthen pluralism? The subject was not even discussed.
Read also: Article reserved for our subscribers French football: “It is high time to breathe new democratic dynamics”
Mechanisms for controlling federal action to strengthen transparency? Let’s get rid of the High Authority, we’ll tell you later what it will be replaced with… or not. All the key subjects for democratic functioning and the transparency of federal action have been skilfully set aside, or postponed.
You have 51.67% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.