Antonio Giraudo returns to speak after twenty years and does so by identifying a precise point to explain why, according to him, the history of Calciopoli may not yet be definitively closed. The former Juventus deputy administrator, definitively expelled by the FIGC in 2011, refers to the decision given on July 16 by the Court of Justice of the European Union: "A judge will rewrite history," he says in the interview given to La Stampa.
This sentence is much more than a personal claim, but it must be placed in the right context. The EU Court has not reopened Calciopoli, has not overturned Giraudo's ban and has not repealed the sanctions imposed on Juventus in 2006. However, it has established a principle that could profoundly change the way Italian sports justice works, and it is precisely for this issue that the former black and white manager has been fighting for years.
What does the EU Court of Justice ruling, to which Giraudo refers, say?
The judgment concerns joined cases C-424/24 and C-425/24, arising from actions brought by Andrea Agnelli, former president of Juventus, and Maurizio Arrivabene, former managing director, against sanctions imposed in the context of a sporting procedure for capital gains (plusvalenze). The Court has ruled that a sporting sanction which is liable to affect rights guaranteed by the European legal order must be subject to effective judicial review.
The crucial point is related to what a judge should be able to do. In the current Italian system, after all the levels of sports justice have been exhausted, the administrative judge can, in certain cases, recognize the right to compensation, but not necessarily eliminate the sanction. According to the Court of Justice of the European Union, this system can only stand if at least the last level of sports justice actually offers the guarantees that characterize an independent and impartial judicial body.
If this were not possible, a judge capable not only of establishing the illegality of the sanction but also, where necessary, of annulling it or suspending its effects must be guaranteed. This is the real turning point. The autonomy of sport cannot be transformed into the impossibility of obtaining from a real judge the annulment of an illegal sanction.
Why Giraudo thinks this could change the history of Calciopoli too
It is precisely on this ground that Giraudo is placing his battle. When he speaks of a judge who could “rewrite history”, he does not claim that the European Court has already declared him innocent in the sporting sense. He claims that today there is a European principle that calls into question the impossibility, contested by his defense, of benefiting from a full judicial review before the state courts of his expulsion from the FIGC.
The difference is fundamental. The decision of July 16 concerns a different case and different leaders, but it establishes a general principle on the judicial protection of persons affected by sporting sanctions. And it is precisely for this reason that Giraudo considers the context in which he has been waging his legal battle for years to have changed.
Could Calciopoli really be reopened after twenty years?
Not automatically. It is now the Italian judges who must implement what the European Court has determined. In the proceedings that led to the referral of the case to the Court based in Luxembourg, it must first be verified whether the Italian sports justice system actually meets all the requirements set by the Court.
Only then will it be possible to understand to what extent this principle can also be used by Giraudo against a sanction that already dates back many years. In fact, crucial issues remain to be resolved: the finality of the judicial decision (res judicata), the procedural deadlines and, above all, what procedure can now allow for the reconsideration of his exclusion.
Even an eventual personal success of the former manager would not automatically cancel the sporting decisions taken against Juventus in 2006, nor would it bring about the return of the championship titles. These are special measures, which refer to different subjects.
For this reason, Giraudos' statement today predicts an outcome that, in the current state of the case, does not yet exist. However, it captures a fundamental novelty: the EU Court has not rewritten Calciopoli, but has opened a question on the possibility that a judge can actually review a sporting sanction. And it is from here that a new phase of his battle could begin.
