Portugal Colonial - Blatter and Platini back in Swiss court in long-running legal saga

A special appeals court, sitting in Muttenz near Basel, will hear a request by the country's Attorney General's office (OAG) to reopen proceedings against Blatter, who turns 89 on March 10, and the 69-year-old Platini.

The long-running legal saga began in 2015 when Blatter quit as head of FIFA in a corruption crisis. It stems from a delayed payment of two million Swiss francs (1.8 million euros) FIFA paid Frenchman Platini in 2011 for consultancy services.

The pair were acquitted by the Swiss Federal Court in June 2022 of charges that included "disloyal management", "breach of trust" and "forgery of securities".

The court concluded that fraud was "not established with a likelihood bordering on certainty", and therefore applied the general principle of criminal law according to which "the doubt must benefit the accused".

The OAG immediately appealed the verdict and the appeal court will hold a hearing from Monday until Thursday and hand down a verdict by March 25.

The defence and prosecution agree that the Frenchman did advise Blatter between 1998 and 2002, during the Swiss administrator's first term at the head of FIFA, and that in 1999 the two men signed a contract agreeing an annual remuneration of 300,000 Swiss francs, to be "paid in full by FIFA".

Blatter and Platini say that at the start they agreed orally, and without witnesses, on an annual salary of one million Swiss francs, but FIFA's financial state did not allow for immediate payment.

In January 2011, "more than eight years after the end of his activity as advisor", Platini "claimed a debt of two million Swiss francs", which FIFA paid.

At the time, Blatter was running for re-election as FIFA president and Platini had become head of European football. In December 2010, FIFA had awarded the 2018 World Cup to Russia and the 2022 World Cup to Qatar.

Prosecutors argue that this was an "unfounded" payment, obtained by "cleverly misleading" FIFA's internal controls through false statements made by the two executives -- the key criterion in the fraud.

N.Esteves--PC