‘Risk to Qatar World Cup, contractors’ following latest corruption allegations

It wasn't long after this image was taken that the first claims of corruption were being made. (File/AFP)
Updated 11 March 2019

‘Risk to Qatar World Cup, contractors’ following latest corruption allegations

  • Doha accused of offering FIFA $880m in secret payments
  • Al Jazeera executives made $400m offer in TV contract, UK newspaper reveals

LONDON: Contractors working on Qatar World Cup projects face an increased risk from Doha being stripped of the rights to host the controversial 2022 tournament following the latest corruption allegations surrounding the Gulf state’s dealings with FIFA, a leading analyst has said.

Qatar allegedly offered football’s governing body as much as $880 million in secret payments at key stages in its efforts to host the 2022 World Cup, it emerged on Sunday.

The new allegations may be “the most damaging so far,” Ghanem Nuseibeh, founder of Cornerstone Global, a management consultancy focused on the Middle East, told Arab News.

Nuseibeh said that the revelations posed a risk to both FIFA and companies currently working on Qatar World Cup projects.

“It is not about individuals but about institutions on both sides: FIFA itself and Qatari channel Al Jazeera. FIFA will now need to decide on how it will investigate itself, rather than individuals connected to it. The reputation of FIFA risks permanent irreversible damage,” Nuseibeh told Arab News.  

“This also carries substantial risks to companies currently working on Qatar 2022 projects. With a real increase in risk in Qatar not hosting 2022, businesses involved will want reassurances from Qatari authorities on what could happen to them if Qatar is indeed stripped of the right to host.”

Leaked files seen by The Sunday Times appear to show that Doha offered FIFA $400 million 21 days before the decision to hold the tournament in the tiny Gulf state was announced.

Executives from the Qatari state-run broadcaster Al Jazeera made the offer at the height of campaigning over the tournament, in a clear breach of FIFA’s own anti-bribery rules, the UK newspaper claimed. 

The TV rights contract, signed in December 2010, reportedly included a $100 million “success fee” to be paid to a FIFA account if Qatar’s bid was successful.  

The British newspaper said it had seen documents that read: “In the event that the 2022 competition is awarded to the state of Qatar, Al Jazeera shall, in addition to the … rights fee, pay to FIFA into the designated account the monetary amount of $100 million.”

Such an offer would represent a huge conflict of interest and a breach of FIFA’s own rules, given that Al Jazeera is controlled by Qatar’s emir, the newspaper reported.

It is also claimed that an second television rights contract for $480 million was offered by Al Jazeera sports spinoff beIN Media in April 2014 — shortly before FIFA cut short its investigation into the World Cup bidding process, and when Qatar’s hosting of the tournament was in doubt. That pushed the amount FIFA was offered by Qatari officials to $880 million.

That contract now forms part of a bribery inquiry by Swiss police, according to the The Sunday Times report.

On Saturday evening, Damian Collins, the chairman of the UK digital, culture and media committee, said FIFA must freeze the Al Jazeera payments and launch an investigation into the contract “that appears to be in clear breach of the rules,” the paper reported.

Under the contract terms, a multimillion-dollar payment, including a portion of the $100 million “success fee” is reportedly due to be paid next month. 

It has long been claimed that Qatar offered bribes to FIFA officials in its bid to host the 2022 World Cup — and this latest report will likely fuel further suspicion that Qatar effectively bought the right to host the tournament.

FIFA did not respond to a request for comment when contacted by Arab News.


Militant sentenced to 19 years for role in Benghazi attacks

Updated 24 January 2020

Militant sentenced to 19 years for role in Benghazi attacks

  • Al-Imam is the second militant convicted in the attacks that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American personnel
  • The head of the extremist militia who directed the siege, Ahmed Abu Khattala, was convicted in 2017 on terrorism-related charges and sentenced to 22 years in prison

NEW YORK: A federal judge on Thursday sentenced a Libyan militant to more than 19 years in prison for his role in the 2012 Benghazi attacks that killed four Americans, including the US ambassador.
A jury convicted Mustafa Al-Imam last year of conspiring to support the extremist militia that launched the fiery assaults on the US compounds but deadlocked on 15 other counts.
The attacks, aimed at killing American personnel, prompted a political fracas in which Republicans accused the Obama administration of a bungled response.
Al-Imam was sentenced to a total of 236 months behind bars. He is the second militant convicted in the attacks that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, communications specialist Sean Smith and security officers Tyrone Snowden Woods and Glen Anthony Doherty.
The head of the extremist militia who directed the siege, Ahmed Abu Khattala, was convicted in 2017 on terrorism-related charges and sentenced to 22 years in prison.
Khattala was accused of driving to the diplomatic mission on Sept. 11, 2012, and breaching the main gate with militants who attacked with assault rifles, grenades and other weapons.
The initial attack killed Stevens and Smith and set the mission ablaze. Woods and Doherty were later killed at a CIA annex.
On Thursday, federal prosecutors in Washington asked US District Judge Christopher Cooper to send a message to others contemplating attacks on Americans overseas, saying Al-Imam deserved the maximum 35-year sentence.
“In the current geopolitical environment, terrorists must understand that there are harsh consequences for attacking diplomatic posts and harming US personnel — particularly a US ambassador,” Assistant US Attorney John Cummings wrote in a court filing.
Defense attorneys said Al-Imam made a “tremendous mistake” by damaging and looting US property after the attacks. But they insisted there was no evidence he intended to harm any Americans, noting jurors could not reach a verdict on the murder charges Al-Imam faced.
“Mustafa Al-Imam is a frail, uneducated and simple man,” they wrote in a court filing. “He is not a fighter, an ideologue or a terrorist. He is a former convenience store clerk whose main loves in life are soccer and family.”
Al-Imam was tried in a civilian court despite the Trump administration’s earlier contention that such suspects are better sent to Guantanamo Bay. His arrest, five years after the attack, was the first publicly known operation since President Donald Trump took office targeting those accused of involvement in Benghazi.
Prosecutors acknowledged there was no evidence that Al-Imam “directly caused” the killings at the US compounds. But they said he aligned himself with Khattala and acted as his “eyes and ears” at the height of the attacks.
During a four-week trial in Washington, prosecutors pointed to phone records that showed Al-Imam was in the vicinity of the mission and placed an 18-minute call to Khattala during a “pivotal moment” of the attacks.
Al-Imam also entered the US compound, prosecutors said, and took sensitive material that identified the location of the CIA annex about a mile away from the mission as the evacuation point for Department of State personnel.
In interviews with law enforcement following his 2017 capture in Misrata, Libya, he admitted stealing a phone and map from the US mission.