The judge ruled up to 3 times that the Federation had to include Constant Van Paesschen and his horse Citizenguard Toscan de Sainte Hermelle in the selection of Belgian riders who will compete during the jumping tests at the World Equestrian Games of Caen. One of these rulings was emitted by the Belgian Arbitration Tribunal for Sport, part of the Belgian Olympic Committee. The rulings are based on the absence of any motivation concerning the selection: No written motivation: event though this was requested with insistence several times before the selection was made. No valid reasons with regards to Constant and Toscan’s results and progression. The combination is currently third best Belgian combination and rider in the FEI ranking. If such a position is not enough to be part of the 4 selected riders, the Federation has to communicate an objective motivation for her choice. The Federation rests on her power, which is, in her eyes, undisputable, even by a judge or the Arbitration Court: “I am the only decider, without having to provide explanations or justification.” This position is illegal as it is. However, adding to this illegality, there are the facts: the results of Constant and Toscan that make their selection seem logical, even for an outsider or a judge. But the Federation takes it even further: she ignores the rulings and takes a decision that is a direct insult to the Artbitration Court for Sport. How can a Federation that does not conform to imposed rulings be expected to impose anything to her own members? An dit does not stop here: the Federation finds a posteriori false motives to justify her attitude. More specifically, we had to hear unacceptable declarations about the health and fitness of Toscan. Not only are these declarations slander, they are annihilated by the Federal veterinarian’s report based on a complete examination of the horse last Monday: Toscan is “found fit to compete”. This report has no remarks and is cristal clear, every declaration suggesting the contrary is slander. These defamatory allegations provoked our public reaction. We wish to reconfirm that both Constant and Toscan are in outstanding shape and are undeniably ready to represent Belgium with honour and efficiently at the World Equestrian Games of Caen. For these reasons, the procedures were continued yesterday. The Court of First Instance has given the explicit order to communicate the selection of Constant and Toscan for Caen yesterday. If not, a penalty payment of 5000 € will be imposed. This decision was transmitted to the Federation yesterday and had to be executed within two hours. We are afraid the Federation will rather spend her budget paying fines and compensations than to change an injustifiable decision. In the current context, the press release emitted by the Federation on Thursday evening, with justification for their refusal to obey the Arbitration Court’s ruling with the excuse of “putting the sport first and respecting the commitments made to the concerned riders”, is particularly offending. Is it not in the interest of the sport that we have clear and objective criteria for selections? What are these commitments with the riders that would have to be seen to, if the selection is illegal?
The judge ruled up to 3 times that the Federation had to include Constant Van Paesschen and his horse Citizenguard Toscan de Sainte Hermelle in the selection of Belgian riders who will compete during the jumping tests at the World Equestrian Games of Caen. One of these rulings was emitted by the Belgian Arbitration Tribunal for Sport, part of the Belgian Olympic Committee. The rulings are based on the absence of any motivation concerning the selection: No written motivation: event though this was requested with insistence several times before the selection was made. No valid reasons with regards to Constant and Toscan’s results and progression. The combination is currently third best Belgian combination and rider in the FEI ranking. If such a position is not enough to be part of the 4 selected riders, the Federation has to communicate an objective motivation for her choice. The Federation rests on her power, which is, in her eyes, undisputable, even by a judge or the Arbitration Court: “I am the only decider, without having to provide explanations or justification.” This position is illegal as it is. However, adding to this illegality, there are the facts: the results of Constant and Toscan that make their selection seem logical, even for an outsider or a judge. But the Federation takes it even further: she ignores the rulings and takes a decision that is a direct insult to the Artbitration Court for Sport. How can a Federation that does not conform to imposed rulings be expected to impose anything to her own members? An dit does not stop here: the Federation finds a posteriori false motives to justify her attitude. More specifically, we had to hear unacceptable declarations about the health and fitness of Toscan. Not only are these declarations slander, they are annihilated by the Federal veterinarian’s report based on a complete examination of the horse last Monday: Toscan is “found fit to compete”. This report has no remarks and is cristal clear, every declaration suggesting the contrary is slander. These defamatory allegations provoked our public reaction. We wish to reconfirm that both Constant and Toscan are in outstanding shape and are undeniably ready to represent Belgium with honour and efficiently at the World Equestrian Games of Caen. For these reasons, the procedures were continued yesterday. The Court of First Instance has given the explicit order to communicate the selection of Constant and Toscan for Caen yesterday. If not, a penalty payment of 5000 € will be imposed. This decision was transmitted to the Federation yesterday and had to be executed within two hours. We are afraid the Federation will rather spend her budget paying fines and compensations than to change an injustifiable decision. In the current context, the press release emitted by the Federation on Thursday evening, with justification for their refusal to obey the Arbitration Court’s ruling with the excuse of “putting the sport first and respecting the commitments made to the concerned riders”, is particularly offending. Is it not in the interest of the sport that we have clear and objective criteria for selections? What are these commitments with the riders that would have to be seen to, if the selection is illegal?