Britain’s parliament is being urged to repeal clauses in new football governance legislation that could leave the door open to sportswashing by authoritarian states.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) has drawn attention to parts of the bill as potentially pointing the way to a harmful increase in state ownership under certain conditions. The bill, which is currently being debated in the House of Commons, would provide the long-promised powers of an independent regulator for English football, but there are concerns that the new body would be unable to intervene if the government overrules a new owner it doesn’t like. There are concerns about this.
The bill proposes new criteria for disqualifying prospective owners, but Article 37(2) will ensure that the government’s ‘foreign and trade policy It stipulates that the “goals of” must be taken into account. HRW believes this could significantly weaken regulators’ ability to prevent states from gaining more control over sports.
“The regressive provisions in the bill will undermine the independence of regulators,” HRW senior coordinator Robbie Newton said in an article published Monday. “Article 37(2) requires the regulator to take into account the UK Government’s ‘foreign and trade policy objectives’ when assessing potential owners, and will ensure that football The ability of regulators to block acquisitions of clubs may be hampered.”
“Given the UK’s trading interests in the region, it is clear that countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE seeking to acquire teams could trigger Article 37(2).”
State ownership has become a particularly pressing topic since Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund took over Newcastle United in 2021. The deal was completed after passing a test for the Premier League’s owners and directors and was satisfied by “legally binding guarantees” from the Saudi government. You won’t be able to control the club. Since 2008, Manchester City has been owned by Emir Sheikh Mansour’s Abu Dhabi United Group, which is officially independent of the UAE state. The owners of both clubs are accused of using soccer to airbrush human rights abuses and other crimes in the states involved.
“Sportswash is a growing trend in global sports,” Newton continues. “Authoritarian states are increasingly turning to sport and sports infrastructure as potential PR tools to launder reputations and exert geopolitical influence. The acquisition of football clubs has proven to be a particularly effective sportswashing tactic because of their lobbying power.”HRW has announced new legislation on “serious criminal conduct” related to the wealth of owners. It is argued that under such provisions, the takeovers of Newcastle and Manchester City would have been blocked.
The bill was introduced in March and is currently in committee. This means that amendments, such as changes to Article 37(2), may be proposed and passed.
