| The Chinese Football Association is a social entity organization which organizes and manages the national football activities.From the perspective of the law of group system,the Chinese Football Association falls into the category of industry associations.Industry associations are self-regulatory intermediaries or professional unions working between government and individuals.Industry associations are non-governmental and not-for-profit.However,the Chinese Football Association has administrative functions for a long history.The emergence of the Chinese Football Association is completely different from that of spontaneously formed sports associations abroad.Its existence does not depend on the spontaneous support of its members,but is formed by the government and the law.The monopoly of the management of the industry has led to the alienation of the legal status and functional power of the Chinese Football Association: the Chinese Football Association excludes jurisdiction in the form of regulations stipulated by industry regulations such as regulations,and the uniformity of football industry disputes is handled by the internal dispute resolution mechanism of the industry.Association Arbitration Commission of the Chinese Football Association made a final ruling that no one could submit to the people’s court.The Chinese Football Association has dealt with industry disputes through internal dispute resolution mechanisms,resulting in a lack of fairness and the efficiency of resolving disputes in Chinese football industry.The manifestations are as follows: First,the Chinese Football Association has long been dominated by administrative forces and has a high degree of administrative intervention.Generalization in all aspects of the management of the Chinese Football Association has made the development of football a lack of the rule of law.Due to the vague nature of the Chinese Football Association,it is difficult to position it when participating in litigation.Second,the Disciplinary Committee of the Chinese Football Association has conducted administrative punishment on violations of discipline.The power of punishment comes from the state’s transfer of the right to manage football industry.The restrictions on the rights of players and the typical administrative penalty rights are not imposed.The difference can be regarded as a disguised administrative punishment,but the Disciplinary Committee’s decision on punishment cannot be appealed to the court,but to the Arbitration Commission set up by the Chinese Football Association.The disciplinary committee’s punishment determines the restriction and deprivation of personal rights and property rights of the members and related rights subjects.While excluding judicial relief,this clearly exceeds the scope of professional management rights.The Arbitration Commission is the legal department of the Chinese Football Association,replacing the people’s court as the ruling body of the football industry dispute.However,the scope of the "soccer industry dispute" is not clear.The "soccer industry disputes" were not clarified,which led to the over-expansion of the scope of Arbitration Commission of the Chinese Football Association.Third,the Chinese Football Association explicitly prohibits its members from resorting to judicial relief in the form of a charter.The people’s court has different attitudes toward the handling of football industry disputes.Analyzing the reasons for the dilemma of dispute resolution of Chinese football industry,there are three main causes: First,it is influenced by the characteristics of the sports industry and the origin of the football industry.The sports industry has the characteristics of professionalism and closure.The long-standing rule control and self-contained arbitrariness gradually form the inertial thinking of the autonomy of the sports industry;the rules of football are formulated to ensure the orderly conduct of the game.In order to promote the professional development of football,the football industry disputes are included in the internal arbitration procedures of the industry,and the protection of player rights is second to the timely resolution of disputes.Second,it is determined by the legal orientation of the Chinese Football Association and the nature of the football association charter.The Chinese Football Association is a product of the refinement of social governance.The self-organization of the society is self-organization and self-management.The Chinese Football Association has the dual attributes of administrative management and industrial autonomy,and over-expands the scope of the Chinese Football Association’s powers.Third,the "governance theory" is the institutional basis.In order to develop the football industry,the nation grants the Chinese Football Association power including the function of organizing and managing the football industry,and providing public services related to football.The high degree of autonomy of the Chinese Football Association has gradually developed into a monopoly of professional management.The system of dispute resolution institution of Chinese football industry is imperfect.Except for criminal offenses,disputes in China’s football industry completely exclude jurisdiction.The purpose of the current system is that the relief of membership rights is inferior to the efficiency pursuit of industry management.In such a position,members’ personal and property rights are highly likely to be ignored.Therefore,from the standpoint of rights relief,this paper analyzes the necessity and feasibility of judicial intervention in the football industry disputes.The establishment of an independent sports arbitration system from scratch,practical obstacles do really exist whether in terms of system establishment costs,operational efficiency as well as personnel deployment.It is more feasible to reform and optimize existing systems.Football industry disputes should not completely exclude jurisdiction.Effective judicial intervention should be designed.By discussing the judicial review of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court towards the Court of Arbitration for Sports,it’s possible to dig out the referential experiences for people’s courts.The Swiss Federal Supreme Court has a cautious approach to the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sports.Only when the ruling may violate the substantive public order can it be the reason for the appeal.China should establish a limited judicial review system.To distinguish the football industry disputes into internal disputes and ordinary disputes.Internal disputes in the industry are disputes involving the technical rules of football.Such disputes are within the jurisdiction of the Chinese Football Association industry and are not within the jurisdiction of the people’s court.As for the ordinary disputes that do not involve the technical rules of football,when the Chinese Football Association Arbitration Commission’s ruling on such disputes may violate the public interest,the people’s courts should retain the judicial review power over such disputes.How to understand the connotation and extension of "social public interest" should be clarified by distinguishing the rights attribute.Differentiating the rights attribute to establish a limited judicial relief mechanism to ensure the autonomy and specialization of the development of the football industry. |
