Maxism

12/10/2009
FEATURE BY GLEN CROMPTON

The FIA is about to elect a new president and every one who has ever had cause to doubt the motives, means or methods of FIA presidents or the FIA itself has a rare opportunity.

Now is the time to decide if you wish to put up with more of the same or act. If allegations that the outgoing president is inappropriately attempting to determine his replacement are true, action is urgently required. That action will need to come from you because I very much doubt the FIA is going to act unprompted. Indeed, I suspect that the FIA would have to be dragged kicking, screaming and spitting bile merely to get it to the brink of action.

The following satirical escapee from my mind was originally hewn as a cheeky attention-getter to open this article. The more I regard it, the less funny it seems so I demoted it.

Maxism noun. [mahks-schizm], Of or pertaining to a hierarchal governance structure whereby supreme executive power is conferred on an individual via an illusory democratic process. Maxists are intolerant of criticism and detractors are dealt with harshly. Maxists become extremely volatile during spawning (election) season and react aggressively when their chosen successor is threatened. Some believe that Maxists are Democravores - creatures that consume democracy.

The FIA's web site assures me that the body is governed very democratically. The president is voted for by The General Assembly. The General Assembly in turn is comprised of representatives who are voted for by peak national motoring bodies. The peak national motoring bodies themselves are voted for by member clubs and the member clubs are voted for by rank and file members. Lots of voting and all very democratic if I am to believe what I read. However, I do not believe what read.

The FIA's web page headed Governance opens with the statement:

"The FIA is structured in line with the proposals contained in the 2001 Statement of Good Governance Principles produced by the Governance in Sport Working Group."

A link is provided to the statement referred to. Item 3.4 of that report is headed "Democracy, elections and appointments". It sets out the expectations and recommendations of the report. I suggest you read it for yourself and then do you best to ensure your representative on the FIA General Assembly has also done so.

If recent reports of Max's threatening letter to Prince Faisal of Jordan are accurate - and to date I have seen no indications to the contrary - then I fear Max has grossly breached these guidelines. If so, he has made a mockery of the FIA's declaration of adherence to the principals referred to above. Now that really would be bringing the sport, the ruling body and its principals of governance into disrepute. Individuals have recently been banned from all things FIA for less.

The following quote is supposedly an extract from Max's letter to Prince Faisal:

"…Any thoughts that after this election everyone in motorsport can unite and work together can now be forgotten...."

Do I detect an insinuation in this alleged quote that even after he departs as the democratically elected president, Max might retain so much power as to be able to cause unpleasantness to those who do not vote as he wishes? That would not be very democratic at all. Moreover, such a notion would reflect poorly on Max's preferred candidate Jean Todt and would seem to indicate that a Todt presidency of the FIA could be no more than a puppet regime. Heaven forbid!

Max has made it ever so very clear how he wishes the FIA General Assembly to vote. His letter to FIA members announcing his non-candidacy gave over much of its content to advocating Jean Todt. That strikes me as the antitheses of how the FIA governance structure is purported to work. The ultimate pinnacle of a chain of elections issuing voting directives backwards down the chain? Nope, that just don't make democratic sense to me.

During the period over which I wrote this piece, I visited the FIA's website a number of times. I noted that the homepage features a scrolling image including Michelle Yeoh, Jean Todt's "girlfriend". Below that was a photograph of Todt himself in his official FIA capacity. I am not saying that a prominent photo or two are prejudicial. I just think it a little "iffy" that during an election, the FIA homepage shows me one candidate and his "girlfriend" but fails to acknowledge the existence of the other. I would have thought the governing body would be eager to avoid that sort of thing. Then again, there is lots I'd have thought about the FIA that turned out to be wrong.

I also have concerns for those who will vote for Max's successor. Each of the voters in the FIA General Assembly is, above and beyond any allegiances within the FIA, respondent to the laws of their own country. Many nations have enacted laws concerning corruption which carry serious penalties. Were I a member of the FIA General Assembly, I'd want be very sure I was casting my FIA presidential ballot in a way that truly and provably represented the views of my own chain of electors. I do not think it would look good if anyone who voted Jean Todt in was subsequently jailed for want of a justifiable basis to their vote.

Of course the "who voted for whom" business raises another couple of issues. The ballot for the FIA president is supposed to be a secret one. But it is only secret insofar as it is overseen by the FIA president and he appears to be the one tossing about threats about who votes for whom. Now that's a little ugly isn't it?

Moreover, the ballot is only secret in the FIA's eyes and the FIA is not a nation, it's merely a body that exists by dent of a chain of agreements. If an actual nation compels one of its citizens to reveal how they voted in the FIA presidential elections, then the citizen would be well advised to do so rather than count on the FIA's protection.

Me, I think there is already enough evidence that Max Mosley has acted in a manner prejudicial to the outcome of the FIA presidential election. I hold that the FIA must investigate the possibility that its president has breached FIA standards if not statues. And I mean really investigate. Invoke at least the same level of investigation apportioned to an allegation from a driver who admits crashing deliberately and was given immunity.

The question begs; is the FIA willing to deal with this morass?

If not then it is our responsibility to beseech the FIA, from the senate all the way down to local clubs. Get your answers in writing folks then crow loud and clear any and every place you can. Publish, blog, approach newspapers, websites, TV stations and even lawyers. I urge anyone who encounters any evidence that their representative on the FIA General Assembly has in any way been lent on from above regarding their upcoming vote to go public with that information by whatever means necessary.

I would very much have liked to have passed onto to you contact details for the FIA's director of communications, Richard Woods. But I gather Mr Woods has taken what is being referred to as a sabbatical from his FIA role in order to undertake a similar role on behalf of Jean Todt. It should be noted that during a libel action against Mr Woods in March 2007, he admitted posting an article on Wikipedia under a false name, which was subsequently found to be defamatory. I recommend you recall that when next you read an unfavourable report about Todt's rival, Ari Vatanen.

Meanwhile, let's just do our best to ensure that the next FIA president is the one we want! I do not want to be sat here in front a computer in a decade tapping out embittered articles laced with shameless slabs of "I told you so!"

Glen Crompton
crompo@pitpass.com

Article from Pitpass (http://www.pitpass.com):

Published: 12/10/2009
Copyright © Pitpass 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved.