Everton’s recent experience with the Premier League’s sanctions raises substantial concerns about the club’s right to a fair trial, potentially infringing upon Article 6 ECHR. The decision-making process of the Independent Commission tasked with evaluating Everton’s alleged breaches of financial regulations came under scrutiny when assessed through both subjective and objective tests concerning bias and impartiality.
The subjective test, which considers personal views and conduct, reveals doubts regarding the panel’s impartiality. Affiliations of panel members raise questions about the independence of the Independent Commission, and the absence of mechanisms to ensure independence and address potential bias further compounds these concerns.
Under the objective test, examining the guarantees offered to exclude doubts about partiality, the Commission’s dismissal of Everton’s mitigating factors lacks objective reasoning. The unique financial circumstances faced by Everton, including significant investments in a new stadium project, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and repercussions from geopolitical issues like the conflict in Ukraine, were not adequately considered. The exclusion of these mitigating factors, despite Everton’s compliance, transparency, and cooperation with the Premier League, suggests a failure of the Commission to objectively assess the evidence.
The New Stadium Project, COVID-19, and the Ukraine conflict all presented challenges beyond Everton’s control, impacting the club’s financial stability. The Commission’s decision to discount these factors when applying the objective test demonstrates a lack of consideration for the unique circumstances Everton faced. The consequences of these events were significant, with losses attributed to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and adverse effects due to Everton’s association with Usmanov’s company USM.
The lack of reasoning or explanations as to why exactly 10 points have been deducted from Everton’s points tally in the league season 2023-2024 raises questions as to the basis of this points deduction. If this is the barometer for Everton’s wrongdoing, Manchester City and Chelsea may find themselves being punished with relegation, being stripped of titles and cup wins, transfer bans and financial penalties. In fact, with no real authorities to base the punishment upon or no guidelines, it is almost guaranteed that any punishment would be appealed unless it was too lenient.
The Commission’s decision failed both the subjective and objective tests concerning Article 6 ECHR. Everton was seemingly denied a fair trial, raising questions about the fairness, transparency, and integrity of the Premier League’s regulatory processes. This case underscores the importance of ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to human rights principles in the context of sports governance and the events of 2024 may prove pivotal in determining the league’s commitment to upholding integrity and ensuring equitable treatment for all member clubs.