The case of Byron Castillo continues to embarrass the Ecuadorian Football Federation, four months after the sanction handed down by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS, acronym for Tribunal Arbitral du Sport, in French) on November 8, twelve days before the opening of the 2022 FIFA World Cup.

After a long legal battle, the Chilean and Peruvian federations succeeded in appealing to CAS to overturn FIFA’s ruling in favor of the FEF’s position on Castillo. Economic and sporting penalties have been announced for tricolor football, including the forfeiture of 3 points in the qualifying phase for the 2026 World Cup.

Castillo did not enter the final list of invitees to Qatar 2022, on the recommendation of the FEF leadership, a situation that caused a debate between DT Gustavo Alfaro and the manager.

What Barragan says

This Tuesday, Santiago Barragán, a member of the Federation’s board of directors, presented in an interview five reasons he believes will influence the Swiss Federal Court to overturn what TAS decided regarding Castillo, who is now a member of Mexico’s León. .

Talking to the radio Sports area, from Quito, Barragán, a lawyer by profession, said: “If the award is annulled, the three points will be returned to us, regardless of whether the tie started or not. We still have time, the qualification round (for the 2026 World Cup) starts in September”.

Causes

The manager added this: “There is an overreach (of TAS) because it was deciding on a person’s nationality. Is TAS competent to decide on a person’s citizenship? In addition, the document says that (Castillo’s) passport is real, but that the information is false. How can I claim that? How can I say that the player was invited, and I am penalized?

In an interview with the capital’s radio, Barragán explained the reasons that could support the FEF’s position. “The Swiss Federal Court is considering five reasons: that the arbitrators of the Court were improperly appointed. That the arbitral body declared itself competent, when it was not competent to review the case. That TAS intervened in matters that were not considered in the lawsuit. That the right to equality of the parties was not respected, and that the final decision is incompatible with the Swiss order.

CAS position

This is one of TAS’s arguments for punishing Ecuafútbol: “The FEF violated Article 21 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code by using a document that contained false information. For counterfeiting cases, FIFA does not refer to national law. Consequently, for FIFA, a decision by Ecuadorian judicial authorities regarding the forgery of a player’s passport is not necessary to establish that the document is fraudulent, in accordance with Article 21 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code. In this case, while it is true that the player’s Ecuadorian passport was authentic, the information contained in that passport was false. In particular, the Refereeing Team was convinced that the player’s place and date of birth in the player’s passport were incorrect as the player was born in Tumac, Colombia on 25 June 1995. Consequently, the Refereeing Team found the FEF liable for the act of forgery under Article 21. paragraph 2 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, even if the FEF was not the author of the forged document, but simply used it”.

As of January 28, 2021, Judge Ronald Guerrero Cruz, of the North 2 Criminal Court Unit, based in Guayaquil, declared habeas data presented by Byron David Castillo Segura and ordered, in an official letter dated February 25 of that year, addressed to the Civil Registry of Ecuador, to register the soccer player as an Ecuadorian citizen. In other words, for all intents and purposes, Castillo is, by judicial order, Ecuadorian. (D)