Human rights groups have criticized the Premier League’s new rules aimed at preventing rogue owners from taking over football clubs. The new measures include using a government banned list to determine who can own clubs, and extending the criminal ownership “disqualifying” offenses to include violence, corruption, fraud, tax evasion, and hate crimes. However, the Saudi ownership of Newcastle United and Qatari Sheikh Jassim’s potential takeover of Manchester United are not affected by the new rules.
Jeed Basyouni, of Middle East group Reprieve, criticized the new rules, stating that they have no teeth and are just for show. Basyouni pointed to the ongoing court case in the USA between the PGA Tour and Saudi-owned LIV Golf, where Saudi’s Public Investment Fund and Toon chairman Yasir Al-Rumayyan are arguing their status as an “instrument” and minister of the Gulf state government mean they should not be forced to give evidence.
Amnesty International also criticized the new rules, stating that they are a step in the right direction but will make little difference unless powerful individuals linked to serious human rights violations overseas are definitively barred from taking control of Premier League clubs and using them for state sportswashing. Amnesty proposed a detailed new human rights-compliant test that would prohibit football ownership where individuals were complicit in acts of torture, slavery, human trafficking, and war crimes.
The Premier League’s new rules were approved “with immediate effect,” and among other new elements to the owners’ and directors’ test, League chiefs agreed to publish the names of any individuals on a new banned list, updated every season. The Prem Board will have the power to prevent any new directors or owners being appointed if they are under investigation for a “disqualifying event.” Potential owners will also face an obligation to meet a published list of “Acquisition Materials” that must be provided to the League as part of the due diligence process.
Any individual with a 25 per cent stake in one club will be forbidden to hold more than 9.9 per cent of another Prem outfit, with the threshold for what is deemed “control” of a club reduced from the current 30 per cent. Club chief executives will also have to comply, while League chiefs can also boot out directors involved in insolvency actions or banned from bodies including the Charity Commission.
In conclusion, while the Premier League’s new rules are a step in the right direction, human rights groups have criticized them for not going far enough to prevent powerful individuals linked to serious human rights violations overseas from taking control of Premier League clubs and using them for state sportswashing. The Premier League needs to adopt an active screening process and not just outsource its due diligence to others to ensure that English football does not become the sportswashing toy of authoritarian figures around the world.