Lawyer questions FIFA's punishment of "Chipi" Vera: "They are taking away his job"
Translated from Spanish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- A lawyer is questioning FIFA's sanction against journalist Jorge "Chipi" Vera, calling it disproportionate and a violation of freedom of expression and the right to work.
- The lawyer argues that international human rights standards apply to organizations like FIFA, regardless of their private status.
- The sanction revoking Vera's credentials is seen as an attack on his ability to work and express himself, particularly in the context of ongoing debates about football rules.
The FIFA sanction against journalist Jorge "Chipi" Vera is facing strong criticism from legal experts, who argue it is excessive and infringes upon fundamental rights.
Lawyer Ezequiel Santagada stated that the measure is "absolutely disproportionate," violating Vera's freedom of expression and directly impacting his right to work. Santagada asserted that even private entities like FIFA are not exempt from international human rights standards.
"That FIFA is a private entity does not make it immune to human rights violations," Santagada said in an interview with ABC TV. He emphasized that FIFA's significant global influence and the special benefits it receives in various countries mean its power extends beyond the purely sporting realm.
That FIFA is a private entity does not make it immune to human rights violations.
Santagada cited the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, adopted by FIFA in 2011, and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression and to which Switzerland, FIFA's headquarters, is a signatory. He argued that states have an obligation to ensure companies under their jurisdiction respect these rights, and organizations must have mechanisms to prevent and remedy violations.
The lawyer specifically addressed the protection of controversial or uncomfortable speech under international law. He noted that jurisprudence clearly establishes that freedom of expression protects not only moderate or socially accepted opinions but also those that are shocking, irritating, or even offensive. Santagada pointed out that Vera's comments were made during a debate about a refereeing decision related to a rule currently causing controversy in international football.
The discourse that bothers is also protected.
Originally published by ABC Color in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.