D’Hooghe puts the picture straight as FIFA ethics clear him of misconduct

Michel DHooghe

By Andrew Warshaw
February 25 – Michel d’Hooghe, FIFA’s longest-standing executive committee member, has been cleared of any misconduct in the bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, bringing an end to what he described a few weeks ago as the hardest period of his life.

FIFA said the adjudicatory chamber of its ethics committee had ruled as unfounded four separate allegations against the highly respected Belgian doctor, head of FIFA’s medical committee, and that “there is insufficient evidence to suggest that Dr D’Hooghe violated any provisions of the FIFA Code of Ethics.”

The chamber, FIFA added, “is satisfied that no further investigation is needed.”

D’Hooghe, who was one of five people being investigated as part of the World Cup anti-corruption probe prompted by Michael Garcia’s infamous report, vehemently denied any wrongdoing and in an interview with this website almost three months ago complained about being treated “like a murderer”. He never understood why he was being investigated, saying he had nothing to hide.

D’Hooghe, who joined FIFA’s exco 27 years ago, had admitted publicly he received a painting from a long-time Russian colleague but that it had no impact on Russia winning the 2018 World Cup ballot, an assertion which has now been endorsed by FIFA’s ethics committee which said it was “satisfied that the painting has no commercial value, as confirmed by two appraisals.”

As d’Hooghe had always maintained, FIFA agreed the painting “was offered as a friendly gesture by Mr Vyacheslav Koloskov” in his capacity as a friend of the Belgian rather than anything to do with him being a member of the organising committee for the winning Russian bid.

The ethics committee also dismissed an allegation that D’Hooghe accepted a trip paid for by an unnamed bidding nation. “The air travel and other expenses for the trip were in fact covered by FIFA as it was related to Dr D’Hooghe’s official function as chairman of the FIFA Medical Committee,” the statement said.

As far as a third allegation was concerned, that D’Hooghe helped secure a business opportunity in Qatar for the son of a close friend, the investigation found “insufficient evidence to prove that Dr D’Hooghe was in any way involved in these efforts.”

And there was also “no concrete evidence” either that he helped his son get a job at the Aspetar medical clinic in Qatar on the back of its bid for the 2022 tournament.

“Dr D’Hooghe had no involvement in the discussions leading up to the offer of employment and that there is no concrete evidence indicating that Dr D’Hooghe’s vote was influenced by this relative’s decision to accept employment in Qatar,” FIFA said.

In a passionate defense of his conduct back in December D’Hooghe, whose native Belgium was a losing candidate in the 2018 ballot, said he simply could not work out why he had been targeted when, he said, he had co-operated fully with Garcia’s 18-month inquiry into the 2018 and 2022 bid process.

Garcia has since resigned over publication – or lack of it – of his anti-corruption file. But one burning question is what will happen to the other high-profile officials who were also facing disciplinary action along with d’Hooghe: Spain’s FIFA vice-president Ángel María Villar Llona and Thailand’s Worawi Makudi (both exco members), German legend Franz Beckenbauer who also voted four years ago but has since retired from FIFA; and Chile’s Harold Mayne-Nicholls, who led the FIFA technical inspection team that evaluated all nine candidates. D’Hooghe has always maintained neither his son’s job nor the painting had anything whatsoever to do with the voting process. “The allegations hurt me,” he said in a previous interview with this website.

“I didn’t promise anything to anyone, I didn’t vote for Russia – I voted for my own country – and I never received Russian art. Do you think after 23 years with a reputation for integrity that I would sell my vote for a stupid painting that has no value? You can come and play darts on it if you like.”

The full FIFA transcript exonerating d’Hooghe is below:

Following the analysis of the final report and investigative files received from the investigatory chamber, and in line with the recommendation expressed therein, the adjudicatory chamber composed of three (3) members has decided that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that Dr D’Hooghe violated any provisions of the FIFA Code of Ethics.

Equally, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that no further investigation is needed in this case.

In particular, the investigatory chamber conducted a full investigation in respect of four different allegations that Dr D’Hooghe may have violated provisions of the FIFA Code of Ethics. During these investigation proceedings, Dr D’Hooghe provided answers during an in-person interview, and other relevant parties in possession of possible relevant information and documentation were also contacted.

The investigatory chamber analysed all available documents on record and assembled them into the investigative files.

First, in relation to the allegation that Dr D’Hooghe received a painting from the Russia Bid Committee, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that the painting has no commercial value, as confirmed by two appraisals, and was offered as a friendly gesture by Mr Vyacheslav Koloskov, a friend of Dr D’Hooghe.

The adjudicatory chamber is also satisfied that there is no new evidence that could justify the need for further investigations, since the matter was already assessed in August 2011 by the former chairman of the FIFA Ethics Committee, Mr Claudio Sulser.

Therefore, proceedings will not be re-opened in the absence of any new and convincing evidence that a violation of the FIFA Code of Ethics has occurred.

Following the inquiry into the bidding process, the investigatory chamber learned that Dr D’Hooghe appeared to have accepted a trip paid for by a bidding nation.

In this context, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that, based on investigations conducted by the investigatory chamber, the air travel and other expenses for the trip were in fact covered by FIFA, as it was related to Dr D’Hooghe’s official function as chairman of the FIFA Medical Committee, while the accommodation costs were covered by the bidding nation.

The adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that Dr D’Hooghe was unaware that this bid committee had covered his accommodation costs for this trip and, in any case, considers that even if he had been aware, there is no indication that this would have influenced his vote.

Therefore, the adjudicatory chamber considers that there is no element justifying the opening of adjudicatory proceedings in this context.

In terms of the allegation that a relative of Dr D’Hooghe was offered employment in Qatar shortly after the 2018/2022 FIFA World Cup™ vote, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that this employment relationship was unrelated to the bidding process, that Dr D’Hooghe had no involvement in the discussions leading up to the offer of employment and that there is no concrete evidence indicating that Dr D’Hooghe’s vote was influenced by this relative’s decision to accept employment in Qatar.

In view of the foregoing, the adjudicatory chamber considers that the opening of adjudicatory proceedings is not warranted in this context.

In relation to the allegation that Dr D’Hooghe had attempted to help secure a business opportunity in Qatar for the son of a close friend, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that there is insufficient evidence to prove that Dr D’Hooghe was in any way involved in these efforts.

As such, the adjudicatory chamber is satisfied that there is insufficient evidence to justify the opening of adjudicatory proceedings with respect to this allegation.