By George Psyllides
A CLAUSE in the football federation’s (KOP) charter could spell the end of Cypriot international Sinisa Gogic’s career.
Article 17, paragraph 8 of the charter states that any Cypriot player returning from playing abroad is obliged to return to the club he belonged to before leaving the island.
Serb-born Gogic, aged 37, was transferred from Anorthosis to Olympiakos Piraeus of Greece in 1997, for around £300,000. After three successful seasons, his contract with Olympiakos expired, and in May this year he agreed to play for Apoel of Nicosia.
He signed a contract with Apoel, and it was submitted for approval to KOP, along with the relevant form asking to be registered with the Nicosia team.
But Anorthosis, who have no apparent use for the player, appealed to KOP, maintaining their right to re-sell him.
The issue went to KOP’s executive committee, who asked their lawyers to rule on the matter.
In a letter from KOP’s legal advisers, Drakos and Efthimiou law office, dated June 23, it was submitted that article 17 (8) was essentially inactive since the introduction of the federation’s transfer framework.
The letter, signed by Efthimios Efthimiou, further advised that since Gogic wanted to play for Apoel, then the executive committee should allow him to do so.
“I believe that if the federation does not cancel its decision then it would risk paying huge compensation to the player because it forces him to play for a team he had not chosen,” Efthimiou said.
Efthimiou said article 17 (8) was still a part of the regulations because of clubs’ insistence to keep it there to protect their rights, and effectively “keep players bound to the clubs.”
“But since international transfers are governed by the transfer framework, and therefore FIFA, then article 17(8) of KOP’s rules cannot be applied,” Efthimiou said.
But, for unknown reasons, KOP ignored the advice of its lawyers and instead asked for a ruling from its Judicial Committee.
The Judicial Committee decided that article 17 (8) still stands because it does not conflict with the transfer framework, but rather complements it.
The transfer framework does not cover Cypriot players who return from abroad, the committee said, and therefore ruled that Gogic should return to Anorthosis.
But in the transfer framework (chapter three, article 6 C), which was also cited by Efthimiou, there is a clear provision governing such cases, which says there is no restriction on returning players going to whichever club they choose.
Apoel has now appealed the decision to KOP’s Arbitration Committee, which is empowered by the federation’s regulations to deal with disputes concerning player status.
The arbitration committee ruled that article 17 (8) could not be applied because it contradicts FIFA regulations, which are binding at national level.
Therefore Gogic should be allowed to play for Apoel, the committee said.
But the saga was far from over.
Anorthosis appealed the decision anew, forcing KOP’s judicial committee to convene once more and decide about the player’s future.
But Apoel strenuously protested such event since the same committee had decided against them in the past.
On Monday night, the judicial committee, as expected, decided that the arbitration committee’s decision would not be upheld and instead ruled that Gogic belonged to Anorthosis.
But the ruling could end up meaning much more.
It appears to be in direct conflict with article 25 of the Cyprus Constitution, which states: “Every person has the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.”
Sinisa Gogic cannot do that because, based on KOP’s article, he has to go to Anorthosis. If he does not want to play for Anorthosis, he will be forced to quit football because he cannot play for any other Cypriot team without Anorthosis’ permission.
And Anorthosis have made it clear they would not allow Gogic to play for Apoel unless they are offered the right amount of money.
In effect, Anorthosis would sell the player twice. Once to Olympiakos, and a second time to Apoel.
The decision could moreover also breach article 26 of the constitution, which states: “Every person has the right to enter freely into any contract subject to such conditions, limitations or restrictions as are laid down by the general principles of the law of contract. A law shall provide for the prevention of exploitation by persons who are commanding economic power.”
KOP’s rule could also violate the European Court’s Bosman ruling, which was adopted by European football’s governing body UEFA.
According to the Bosman ruling, European Union players are allowed a free transfer at the end of their contracts, with the proviso that they were transferring from one EU federation to another.
Cyprus is not yet an EU member, but it is a member of UEFA, which has incorporated the Bosman ruling into its regulations.
