BROGAN ROGAN TREVINO AND HOGAN on 26TH OCTOBER 2019 2:49 PM
Dessybhoy
You won’t but what many shareholders don’t realise is that if you are a shareholder and you don’t physically click on the link and actually vote, then your votes will be cast WITH THE BOARD BY PROXY.
So any shareholder who does nothing is, in effect, voting with the board.
On the resolution itself the position should be made clear;
Celtic have never said that there is nothing to investigate.
Celtic have previously called upon the SFA to conduct a full inquiry into all aspects of Governance surrounding 2011/2012 — The SFA refused.
The SPFL similarly called upon the SFA to conduct a full inquiry — The SFA refused.
The SFA themselves said that an internal inquiry was needed into the licensing issues we raised in 2013 and the former CEO publicly stated that he felt the SFA had been misled.
That SFA inquiry led SFA Officers to the conclusion that they had enough evidence to bring disciplinary charges which they did.
However, an independent judicial panel ruled that the SFA cannot legally prosecute those charges before an independent judicial panel appointed by the SFA and recommended that the SFA refer the entire matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
That was almost 18 months ago and no such action has been taken.
The Celtic Board had previously advised that the best thing to do was to leave all of this to the SFA and reported to us that there was no reason for the SFA not to refer the matter to CAS.
The CEO of the SFA previously announced that a decision ON WHETHER OR NOT TO TAKE THE MATTER TO CAS – would be made by Christmas 2019. — which means that it is not certain that the matter will be referred to CAS at all.
The original Resolution asked Celtic to refer this matter to UEFA.
Resolution lawyers have been in direct touch with UEFA and they advised that they could not correspond with anyone other than a member club and effectively invited Celtic to refer the matter to them.
The SFA said they could not refer the matter to UEFA for timebar reasons, but confimred they would respond to and comply with any enquiry from UEFA – IN THE INTERIM THEY CONDUCTED THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION AND BROUGHT THEIR OWN CHARGES BUT HAVE BEEN JUDGED AS INCOMPETENT IN SO DOING.
Accordingly, Celtic, the SFA, the SPFL and UEFA have all indicated that they are willing to look at the issues raised and the SFA have actually brought disciplinary charges in relation to the same but can’t progress them for legal reasons.
Back in 2013 the resolutioners pointed out that there was eveidence that would lead to charges but suggested to Celtic that the SFA were not the competent body to investigate and deal with that evidence or any rule breaches.
Celtic disagreed and suggested the matter be left to the SFA. That is till their position despite the ruling of the independent judicial panel saying that the SFA are not competent to deal with this matter.
THIS NOW MEANS THAT IN RELATION TO THE CHARGES OF BREACHING BOTH SFA AND UEFA RULES, THERE IS A JUDICIAL DECISION WHICH SAYS THOSE RULES AND THEIR ALLEGED BREACH CANNOT BE LEGALLY DETERMINED BY THE SFA.
Accordingly someone has to conduct the hearing and we suggest referring the matter to UEFA whereas the board, for reasons best known to them, want to stick with the SFA who have already been deemed incompetent by their own judicial panel.
We don’t know why the board don’t want to refer this to UEFA, nor why they think it is not “in the best interests of the club” to do so.
Every shareholder in the club is a part owner – and surely the board of directors should be making it clear to everyone with a financial interest as to why they wish to allow this matter to be dealt with by an incompetent body instead of the European Governing Body whose rules and licences are under discussion.
We are not asking Celtic to commence any proceedings, or dig about for evidence, or to start anything.
We are only asking them to respond positively to UEFA’s invitation at a time when the SFA have been ruled incompetent and have not take any action on the recommendation to go to CAS.
Equally, further questions have to be asked as how the SFA managed to get themselves into a legal position where a judicial panel has ruled that they cannot conduct hearings or prosecute supposed breaches of their own rules or the rules of UEFA for whom they are a licensing authority?
The SFA have been deemed legally and professionally incompetent and we cannot figure out on what basis a very experienced and highly professional Celtic board can justify its continued trust in such an organisation.
It should also be added that since the instigation of the internal SFA inquiry which led to the ruling that the SFA cannot perform a disciplinary function here, the CEO (Stewart Reagan) – The Footballing and Corporate Compliance officer (Andrew MacKinlay) and the legal compliance officer (Tony McGlennan) who brought the charges have all left the SFA and moved on leaving this dreadful mess behind.
Either some or all of these three must have known that the SFA could not proceed legally or they were totally and utterly incompetent and did not know their own rules and procedures.
If the SFA were incompetent then why should the board of CELTIC PLC continue to support such incompetence?
Or might it be the case that Stewart Reagan and others have played the Celtic PLC BOARD like a fiddle knowing full well that their disciplinary proceedings would never be deemed competent – in which case our board look like fools.
The current resolution is merely a request to refer the entire matter to someone competent and there is no good reason that we know of not to do so.
But the board are against it for whatever reason.
Personally, I think this does nothing for Celtic commercially as serious investors, sponsors and advertisers would like to know that the business of football in Scotland, and the business theatre win which Celtic PLC is forced to operate is properly run by a competent Governing body.
Alas a judical panel has determined that the SFA can’t enforce its own rules or those of UEFA – and we are all free to make of that what we will.
It is a mickey mouse, two bit organisation, which reeks of incompetence from head to foot.
DESSY