Court case after club is suspended following Internet comments

A judo club was recently suspended by its federation after forum (not this one) and Facebook comments were made challenging the selection of a player for the national team.

It was not a an issue about private persons or libel, but an issue of the selection process of the federation in general.

The public comments were made by the secretary of the club. In response, the judo federation suspended the entire club for 6 months with as justification "against the spirit of Judo and contrary to the ethos of the sport".

There are about 70 members in the club, who potentially are temporarily affected by the decision.

The decision does not seem to have been preceded by much due process, and seems to have been more an act of retaliation than protection again libel or a correction of facts.

The penalty was issued by the executive branch of the federation, which seems to operate without separation of powers (executive, legislative, judicial), hence joining the process of prosecutor, judge and jury in one and the same entity. The club was not heard prior to judgment and the federation violated its own rules.

The club has filed suit. The incident took place in Europe (Ireland). The case is widely reported in national newspapers, and not about private persons. It is, however, not possible to independently assess the correctness and completeness of the news reports:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/muskerry-judo-club-seeks-end-of-suspension-over-facebook-comments-1.1549592
http://www.newstalk.ie/Cork-Judo-club-suspended-over-Facebook-comments
http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2013/1004/world/judo-club-seeks-to-reverse-suspension-245180.html

If the comments were below the belt then that's an automatic DQ under the new rules

Ricebale wrote:If the comments were below the belt then that's an automatic DQ under the new rules

But the federation used a pistol grip, shido!

Ricebale wrote:If the comments were below the belt then that's an automatic DQ under the new rules

Not legally possible in Europe.

A disqualification would legally only apply to sporting rules, namely violation of a sports rule during a match or similar. It is not legally possible for a disciplinary violation that really has nothing to do with sports-specific interaction. Doesn't matter whether the federation claims or does this or puts it in rules or regulation, not even what they prefer doing in Ireland, it's all illegal and the federation has no leg to stand on. Disciplinary procedures are subject to the proceedings and protections as provided in article 6.1 and 6.2 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The solicitor is right. If as a federation or other private entity in Europe you want play judge, very well, but you better make sure you have all legal guarantees and due process in place including that the accused party is heard before any judgment is made, that the party has access to the complete file before any judgment, that the party is allowed to seek and be assisted by counsel during such proceeding, etc. Absent any of that, and the thing will be throw out by court, just watch.

That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a code of conduct. That's not the point. If there is a pre-existing code of conduct, and if that code of conduct specifies what sanctions are the consequence of a specific violation, then a sanction may be legal PROVIDED that due process in respect of the European Convention of Human Rights art. 6 and the provisions of the Irish constitution are adhered to. It's the same for everything regarding sports entities, and for any similar matter including doping. If there truly is a problem or violation the federation should not be afraid to adhere to due process and all legal provisions, why would they ? Unless of course they know that if due process and fairness is applied they would not have a leg to stand on.

Whoosh!

Old Chestnut wrote:Whoosh!

Yes, from our own Whoosidan!