Istanbul 2012 – The First Controversy
We’re still a couple of months away, and already the first drama for the 2012 Chess Olympiad has begun. And it promises to be a real doozy.
The Turkish Chess Federation has written an open letter refusing the applications of arbiters from a bunch of countries, on the basis that these federations have in the past either launched or supported legal action against FIDE (the world chess federation).
The countries under the ban include:
- England
- France
- Georgia
- Germany
- Switzerland
- Ukraine
- …and the United States of America.
This is a big deal. These chess federations comprise some of the heavyweights of the chess world, encompass a third of all registered chess players worldwide, and, of course, represent some very high quality arbiters.
The letter, written by the president of the Turkish Chess Federation, Ali Nihat Yazici, argues that federations who sue FIDE are hurting the development of chess by diverting funds from chess projects to FIDE’s legal defence. Verbatim:
“Some federations launched or supported court cases against FIDE and thus created financial problems for FIDE and a loss of distributable income for worldwide chess development.”
This, as a consequence, is undoubtably true. But the real questions are whether the legal action was justified, whether FIDE bears any fault, and perhaps most importantly of all, whether national chess federations have the right to hold the world chess federation, to which they must contribute a sizeable financial amount every year, to account when allegations of corruption arise.
I, like most chess fans, never want to see the global governing body of my sport spending chess development funds to defend itself in court. I also never want it to act in such a way that it needs to do so. But certainly, I don’t want any authority to place itself above accountability, be it in sport, government or society. There always has to be a system of checks and balances, especially for an organisation as rumour-rife as FIDE.
Scaring off federations from doing so will lead to either a breakaway organisation of disenfranchised countries, or perverse incentives for FIDE to act above the law – or both. I’m not accusing FIDE of anything – I have no leaning in the world of chess politics – but surely these consequences are far worse for chess than those cited in Mr Yazici’s letter.
One final little factoid on which I’ll offer no comment. The largest ongoing case against FIDE was brought forward by the English and Georgian chess federations, claiming that the appointment of five FIDE Vice-Presidents violates FIDE’s constitution (which allows the FIDE President to appoint only two). The five nominated VPs are: Chu Bo, Israel Gelfer, Ilya Levito, Boris Kutin… and Ali Nihat Yazici.
Latest articles
-
10 hours 12 min ago
-
1 day 10 min ago
-
1 day 1 hour ago
-
2 days 3 hours ago
-
2 days 23 hours ago
-
3 days 2 hours ago
-
3 days 22 hours ago
-
5 days 49 min ago
-
5 days 1 hour ago
-
5 days 12 hours ago
-
5 days 23 hours ago
-
6 days 4 hours ago
-
6 days 10 hours ago
-
1 week 34 min ago
-
1 week 7 hours ago
-
1 week 22 hours ago
-
1 week 1 day ago
-
1 week 1 day ago
-
1 week 1 day ago
-
1 week 3 days ago










Comments
doubleroo
11 months 1 week ago
Permalink
If this was published on April the first I would never pick it as a real story.
Isaac Thabo
11 months 1 week ago
Permalink
David, I believe the first question you should ask before all others is whether arbiters are responsible for the actions of their federation with regards to the federation suing FIDE.
Lee
11 months 1 week ago
Permalink
Clearly the answer to that question would be 'no, they are not'.
Your comment
By posting a comment you are agreeing to abide our Terms & Conditions