Tunisian Parliament Holds Hearing on Sports Law Reform
Experts Raise Concerns Over Independence of Sports Structures
The Commission on Education, Vocational Training, Scientific Research, Youth, and Sports, part of the Assembly of Representatives of the People (ARP), held a hearing on Thursday to discuss a group of experts in sports law and sports disputes. The hearing was part of the ongoing examination of the organic law proposal on sports structures, attended by the Commission's president, Abderrazek Aouidet, and several deputies.
Fethi Mouldi, a specialist in sports law, highlighted the issue of independence of sports structures, pointing out that despite the frequent mention of "independence" in several articles, the mechanisms for its implementation are lacking, rendering the principle meaningless. He estimated that the powers granted to the minister in charge are excessive and unacceptable, considering that the text "establishes a form of tutelage" over sports structures.
Mouldi recalled that the principle of functional independence of sports structures is one of the essential foundations of international sports federations, emphasizing that any infringement on this principle could negatively affect the relations of national sports structures with international institutions and the conformity of the national legal system with international standards and norms.
He also noted that the proposal does not take into account the specifics of small associations and amateur clubs, which are unable to cope with the administrative and bureaucratic procedures outlined in the text, calling for simplification of the legal drafting and reduction of procedural details.
Maher Snoussi, an expert in sports law, estimated that the law proposal should constitute a general legislative framework reflecting the state's philosophy on the sports phenomenon and the management of sports structures, which are undergoing a genuine structural and institutional crisis.
He highlighted that one of the main weaknesses of the project lies in the "absence of a clear and precise distinction between amateur and professional sports." He also denounced an "inflation of law resulting from a manifest confusion between legislative, regulatory, and organizational domains," which, in his opinion, deprives the text of its organic law character.
Regarding sports companies, Snoussi stated that their regulation, spread over 16 articles, remains written in a regulatory form that is not deep enough, in the absence of a genuine sports professional regime. He proposed the establishment of a set of legal and fiscal incentives to encourage the creation of these companies.
Snoussi also estimated that the proposal introduces a dangerous precedent by providing that all questions related to Tunisia's representation abroad be subject to the prior approval of the Ministry of Sports. According to him, such a formulation is unacceptable from the point of view of international institutions and would lead to the rejection of any Tunisian candidacy, considered as emanating from the Ministry of Sports.
Regarding control and arbitration bodies, the expert stated that the recognition of their decisions requires their submission to several fundamental principles, including independence and neutrality, to ensure the protection of the rights of all parties. He considered that the proposal contravenes these principles by providing for the designation of five members of the National Governance and Ethics Council of Sports by the Minister of Sports.
In the same context, the expert considered that the fact of granting the Minister of Sports the power to impose sanctions on the members of the executive boards "constitutes a legislative regression contrary to the principles of international sports law." He recalled that the principle of contradictoriness can only be guaranteed before the courts.
For his part, Moncef Ben Zayed, a specialist in sports law, estimated that the proposal marks a profound transformation of the philosophy of sports organization through the introduction of sports companies with commercial objectives, in an attempt to build a model that reconciles investment and sports identity. He emphasized that the text has opted for an intermediate solution by not making the creation of sports companies obligatory.
Tarek Mansour, a specialist in sports law and sports disputes, considered that the creation of sports companies is an urgent necessity to move towards professional sports. He proposed the idea of creating a "sports investment bank" to finance sports projects and restructure the debts of clubs.
He added that it is essential to take into account, in the examination of this initiative, the proposal of the law on the creation of public establishments responsible for the management and maintenance of sports infrastructure, considering the link between the two texts.
During the debates, the deputies emphasized the need to establish a balance between encouraging investment in the sports sector and preserving the identity of clubs and the independence of their decisions.
At the end of the hearing, the experts unanimously emphasized the need to find a precise balance between the urgency of accelerating the reform of the national sports system and the importance of avoiding any haste in drafting the organic law on sports structures, in order to ensure the adoption of a coherent, clear, applicable, and conforming text to international principles and norms as well as international sports legislation.
