São Paulo ethics committee drops bid to expel Massis over mismanagement | OneFootball

São Paulo’s Ethics Committee ordered the definitive dismissal of the complaint that sought the opening of disciplinary proceedings, the suspension, and the expulsion of president Harry Massis.

Filed on July 30 by an opposition group led by council member Carlos Sadi, the petition accused the chairman of alleged reckless management, violations of the club’s bylaws, and damage to governance.

Led by rapporteur Milton José Neves Júnior, the decision ordered the case to be closed without a ruling on the merits. The resolution was based on three main pillars: the loss of the underlying purpose, the expiration of the regulatory deadlines, and the lack of concrete evidence for the other allegations.

Grounds Cited by the Ethics Committee for the Dismissal

Transfer ban and loss of purpose: The main time-sensitive element of the accusation was the transfer ban imposed by FIFA due to the debt to Lazio in the signing of player Marcos Antônio. As the board paid the amount of €1.05 million (around R$ 6.2 million) on August 5, the punishment was lifted. The rapporteur found there had been a “supervening loss of purpose,” also concluding that the delay did not prove bad faith or reckless management, but rather a temporary setback.

Untimeliness of the complaints: The Committee pointed out that almost all of the facts cited were time-barred. The club’s Internal Regulations set a 15-day limit for filing complaints; only the transfer ban issue was submitted within the permitted window.

Generic allegations and lack of evidence: Complaints about salary delays and football management were classified as “vague, purely circumstantial, and generic.” The opinion stressed that the complaint relied on news reports without gathering sufficient documentation to identify Massis’s conduct individually.

Administrative res judicata: Questions about the legality of the composition of the Board of Administration were dismissed because they had already been the subject of a prior decision in another internal proceeding.

Opposition Reaction

The resolution sparked strong dissatisfaction among the council members who filed the request.

The opposition criticized the strict interpretation of the 15-day deadline and the body’s slowness in ruling on the case, confirming that they are considering appeals and other possible measures to challenge the dismissal through administrative channels.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.