Strategic and policy context

• Author: Argyro Elisavet Manoli
• Pages: 9-11

9

2.0 Strategic and policy context

2.1 Introduction

This chapter outlines the policy and strategic background for the mapping review. It al so

briefly considers key policy developments at an EU level focused on addressing

corruption in sport. This section provides an introductory context to the research, but

cannot do justice to the range of policies, programmes and academic discussions that

have direct relevance to the topic.

2.2 Policy context

The European Commission’s White Paper on Sport (2007), the 2011 Communication on

“Developing the European Dimension in Sport”

1 and subsequent EU Work Plans for Sport

(2011-20142 and 2014-20173) have all emphasised the importance of promoti ng

integrity in sporting practices in cluding the need to tackle corruption. Poli cies to address

corruption in sport have emphasi sed the need for structured dialogue between

governments and sports organisations and support for relevant projects and networks. A

first priority of the Work Plans in addressing corruption has been the fight against

match-fixing, as this has been commonl y recognised as one of the most prevalent forms

of corruption in sport. Other key priorities under the theme of promoting integrity

include anti-doping and promotion of good governance.

Council “conclusions on combati ng match-fixing” adopted in 2011 and the Presidency

“conclusions on establishing a strategy to combat the manipulation of sport results”

adopted in 2012 underlined the concern of EU Member States regarding the

manipulation of sports competitions.

The Communication “Towards a comprehensive European framework on online

gambling” in 2012 identified integrity of sport and match-fixing as one of five key

priorities. The communication included a number of measures aimed at addressing

match fixing including: the need for more efficient exchange of good practices i n the

provision of betting-related match-fixing; establishing minimum conflict of interest

provisions, for example betting bans for sport people and sport officials as well as the

exclusion o f youth events from betting; and introducing hotlines and other reporting or

whistle-blowing alert mechanisms.

The European Commission has supported a number of i nitiatives aimed at understanding

the state of play of measures to address match fixing and best practices in prevention,

detection, sanctions and cooperation. A study on match fixing was carried out for the

Commission to improve knowledge of how national criminal law provisions in the Member

States applied to match fixing and identifying possible divergences or discrepanci es.4

While the study found th at match fixi ng is crimi nalised in all Member States, it also

found that incrimination of sport offences did not necessarily lead to better enf orcement

1 European Commission (2011). Developing the European Dimension in Sport European

Commission. Published January 18.

2 Council of the European Union (2011). Resolution of t he Council and of the Representatives of

the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on a European Union Work

Plan for Sport for 2011-2014.

3 Council of the European Union (2014). Resolution of t he Council and of the Representatives of

the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 2 1 May 2014 on the

European Union Work Plan for Sport (2014-2017).

4 KEA (2012) Match-fixing in Sport: A mapping of criminal law provisions in the EU 27.