Acad.
E. Jetchev
EABA
President
Mr.
V. Bardarov
EABA
Administrative Secretary
07
November 2005
Cc:
EABA EC and AIBA ERB
Members
Heads of National Boxing Associations √ EABA Members
Earlier
we have informed you about the opinion of the initiative group regarding the
extraordinary congress (the copy is attached). As a response to the letter all
European Associations received a number of letters from the people whose
interests were directly or indirectly touched upon by the Extraordinary Congress
as well as people who were accused in the letter of Initiative group of taking
the advantage of their official position damaging the development of European
boxing. Replied letters
contained definite information which we consider not true and detractive. We
think that it is necessary to controvert the facts which do not correspond to
the reality.
Letter
of Mr. Rosengren (dated 4 October 2005 by e-mail):
Mr
Rosengren writes that he
fully shares the thoughts of the initiative group mentioned in the letter of 23
September 2005 (there are a lot of power violations and taking advantage of
official position in European boxing and we are to improve it) he is also sure
that many European nations agree with it. He also accepts the possibility of
holding an extraordinary congress during 4 months after the request. But still
mentions that he can not understand what we need it for. We accept that Mr.
Rosengren is a very diplomatic person. But evidently he does not agree with the
initiative group for the urgent need of changes in European boxing because he
understands that time is against us. And it is important to make healthy
atmosphere in European boxing as soon as possible in order to achieve good and
fair results and work for the development of boxing and not to its degradation.
The
demand of holding an extraordinary congress clearly says that the situation must
be changed as soon as possible. We cannot wait and watch the death of healthy
sports relationship and mutual respect.
We
also do not understand what program we are talking about. If it is crisis
management program of firing people whose work led to the crisis then it can be
done only during the discussion at the extraordinary congress and this is what
the initiative group is demanding. And of course such a program can not be
examined by people who are in charge of the crisis. If we are talking about
another program, our duty is to clarify that the initiative group accused
definite people of definite things and the most suitable way to solve the
problem was mentioned clearly - it is mutual
discussion and mutual decision. If Mr. Rosengren means something else then it
must be clarified.
As
Mr. Rosengren says that the question of holding an extraordinary congress was
discussed in Bucharest then there was a demand to hold it that is why we must
take it seriously. But the initiative group reminds that the demand of holding
an extraordinary congress was made one month later √ 19 September after the
congress in Bucharest which took place 19 √ 20 August. By the way Swedish mass
media often quotes Mr. Rosengren speech to the address of RBF which contains
impartial pronouncements and threatening promises of fines. We suppose it to be
no ethical and remind about our right to make a denunciation in mass media.
Letter
of Mr. Bardarov, Administrative Secretary (dated 20 September 2005 on the
official EABA blank):
Mr
Bardarov has read Mr Rosengren▓s letter and comments:
a)
The letter was not written on the blank of Russian Boxing Federation, did
not have reference number and stamp. We inform that this letter was not from
Russian Boxing Federation but from Initiative Group, which initiate an
Extraordinary Congress for re-election of EABA official bodies in accordance
with EABA Regulations, and this letter should not be written on the blank of
Russian Boxing Federation and does not belong to any concrete Federation.
Besides, according to EABA Articles such letter must contain the reason why such
an Extraordinary Congress shall be convened and what questions will be discussed.
And according to the logic we should have possibility to identify the
Federations which signed such letter, they should be not less then 10. However,
in this case, the Federations which have signed the Demand in addition confirmed
their signatures with official letters from Federations on Acad. E. Jetchev
request (dated 20.09.2005. on the official EABA blank)
b)
Mr. Bardarov writes that there are no Federation names and positions in
the attached subscription list. Possibly
he is talking about the letter sent from the office of the General Secretary
because in the letter sent by the IG there were 3 lists with countries and
signatures but not one sent to National Federations from EABA. There is nothing
said in EABA Regulations about the exact form of Demand, but 3 items: reasons,
signatures of 10 Federations and agenda. All these items were written in our
letter and the Federations additionally confirmed their demand by separate
letters with signatures and stamps on Jetchev request. And more: while the
demand is accepted, is under discussion and is distributed by EABA √ it means
that it is legitimate. In opposite case the Secretary General should inform all
Federations that the letter has no legal force without discussions the reason
and time.
c)
Bardarov also says that the reason has no prove and not urgent but EABA
Regulations say nothing about somebody who can define the importance and reason
of Extra Congress. Bardarov writes that it is economically not wise to convene a
Congress five month before the planned one. We who singed the letter want in
accordance with Regulations to re-elect EABA officials as soon as possible. And
though Bardarov does not agree with us we ask in accord with Article 5 EABA
Regulations to fulfil our demand. According to our opinion the present situation
in EABA is dangerous for EABA boxing, because it prevents not only its
developing but even its normal existence. And needs urgent and decisive measures.
The peculiarities of the raised problems and claim to the concrete leaders are
known not only to EABA members but also to AIBA, (the leaders of AIBA do not
consider this situation normal. And due to some interviews in press it is known
to the world sport community. The most of those who know the situation think
that this situation contradict the spirit of sport. We consider it very
important to resolve the raised questions in a very quick way for the sake of
boxing.
Letter
of Emil Jetchev, EABA president (circular 37/05 of 4 October 2005)
a)
In order to resolve any conflict or problem we need to know all the facts.
It is impossible that EABA president does not know about dissatisfaction of
National Associations and separate officials that work for EABA. It is
impossible not to pay any attention on regular announcements and official
letters in which EABA officials are accused of improper work and taking
advantages of their positions. Letters from National Federations of Ukraine,
Ireland, Russian, Moldova, a letter of Malinovsky (Estonia), Shaidulin (Bulgaria)
and Siverstad▓s speech during the EC meeting in Bucharest √ all this can not
be ignored. All the European Associations have already read these letters but
still the President of EABA according to his words proclaims to be uninformed
with the existence of such documents. He says that he has never during the last
35 years and especially for the last 10-15 years had personal reclamations and
critics of unfinished work. ⌠The were some critical remarks to the address of
several commissions┘┘■. Nothing was said about official notes concerning
taking advantages of their positions by the concrete officials.
b)
Ignoring the existence of such documents Mr. Jetchev shows his negative
attitude to them. As the Pres of EABA Mr. Jetchev says that he is against the
author▓s position concerning ineffective work of EABA officials, as well as
AIBA Rules violation and dissatisfaction of National Associations with the work
of EABA leading body. Still he admits that healthy development of boxing is
impossible without constructive critics. It is only due to the mutual work and
cooperation one can create better conditions for box development. It is natural
for any organization to make mistakes, it is impossible to predict everything.
But putting a veto on discussions of some topics Jetchev as the Pres of
EABA deprives himself from the ability of holding a dialog with National
Associations. He also wants them that they will never be supported in case they
criticize their colleagues and they will not get understanding in case of
conflict.
c)
Mr. Jetchev talks about the artificial nature of the situation and
proclaims all the critics to the address of EABA to be out of arguments. But
there are no investigations held and no questions asked. It really looks like
deliberate ignoring of everything connected with people who are closed to
Jetchev. The most actual questions in this situation are the election of some
⌠outstanding specialists■ to the EABA leading bodies. It is good that Mr.
Jetchev announces his position and leaves the National association ability to
compare it with real facts. But we would like Mr. Jetchev to listen to his
subordinates and react on critics, not with the complete refusal but giving
objective answers. His definite position concerning the Extra Congress leaves no
freedom for National Associations.
d)
In circular
39/05r Mr Jetchev writes: ⌠on the AIBA ER Bureau meeting on 16 October 2005 in
Liverpool everyone voted unanimously against the Extraordinary Congress■ (quote).
Do not even taking into consideration the number of participants of the AIBA ERB
meeting in Liverpool, among them majority of those whose work is at stake and
those people whom we want to re-elect, but even if we do not taking into
consideration people who voted we can say only the following - EABA is not close
circle of people who are defining the fate of boxing in Europe. This is the
organisation which consists of 50 National Federations. The National Federations
have the right to express their opinion the same way as those 10 persons who
were present in Liverpool meeting and expressed their opinion there.
Doganeli▓s
Letter (dated 24 October 2005, distributed via e-mail):
Unfortunately,
this message from an EABA official contains nothing but emotions. Despite the
fact that it was against this man▓s specific actions that spearhead was
vigorously protesting, and it was Mr. Doganeli whom many athletes, referees and
coaches reproached for warped judgment, EABA Secretary General did not duly
disprove a single fact focusing his emotional letter on forthright statements,
accusations and threats √ to turn to the EABA Legal Committee again.
Mr.
Doganeli might be convinced that he is acting in the best interests of European
boxing, but he cannot but recognize that his name has given rise to lots of
claims from National federations √ not only verbal claims made during internal
meetings, but also written claims from people who were not afraid to sign and
declare their problems and irreconcilable differences. All National Federations
as well as еABA
and AIBA officers are aware of the situation as such claims were repeatedly
stated at recent еABA
sessions and aroused broad resonance. In this situation, when different National
Federations claim that it has become unbearably difficult to perform work due to
the fault of the current Secretary General and state facts of intentional damage
to fair sports relations in European boxing and repeated violations of the еABA
and AIBA Charters, Mr. Doganeli, without ever disproving any facts, is trying to
narrow down everything to a problem of one man √ existence and activity of E.
Khusainov, the current President of the Russian Boxing Federation.
As
long as Mr. Doganeli allows himself to make a public statement that Mr.
Khusainov illegally displaced his federation president predecessors, this
accusation requires proof. The Russian Boxing Federation has necessary documents
√ statements and election programs of candidates running for this post,
minutes of the meetings of the Federation▓s Vice-President Bureau and
Executive Committee, which prove that Mr. Khusainov was elected to this position
in accordance with the regulations. If Mr. Doganeli has evidence of the opposite
facts, he should produce it when he brings up such issues. If this accusation is
unfounded and based exclusively on personal dislikes, then this is a reason for еABA
and AIBA senior management to consider whether a man guided by intrigue rather
than higher values and fair sports principles can hold the еABA
Secretary General post.
While
emotionally stating that the letters describing his violations of the еABA
Charter and abuse of power were reviewed at the Lausanne meeting of the еABA
and AIBA Legal Committee (18-21 January 2005), Mr. Doganeli▓s reminds of the
Legal Committee▓s decision to recommend that the еABA
and AIBA Executive Committees warn Mr. Khusainov and the Russian Boxing
Federation and adds the Legal Committee▓s decision ⌠should have been
approved in Bucharest on 20-22 August 2005■, but thanks to Mr. Doganeli▓s
⌠good will■ ⌠this question was taken off from the agenda following some
members▓ requests■. In doing so, Secretary General somehow forgets to tell
about the Liverpool session of the AIBA Executive Committee (28-29 January 2005)
where AIBA President Prof. Chowdhry made pointed remarks regarding the Legal
Committee and Mr. Doganeli▓s saying that they were acting without his consent.
It was recommended that the Legal Committee ⌠abstain from comments on
questions which are beyond its competence■. This must be the reason why no
comments followed in Bucharest. In any case, no document has it that the Legal
Committee▓s recommendations regarding the Russian Boxing Federation were
included into or excluded from the agenda. Mr. Doganeli's statement is unfounded.
Further
on, Mr. Doganeli's letter mentions that Mr. Khusainov broke some promise. It
should be reminded here that both Mr. Khusainov and Mr. Doganeli are official
European boxing representatives. If there had been any arrangements, which could
impact any relations between these high-ranking boxing officials, such
arrangements should have been documented and communicated to еABA
management and other еABA
officials when necessary. Mr. Doganeli does not provide any documents to prove
this accusation.
Complete
disregard of refereeing complaints filed by Irish, Estonian, Belorussian and
other National Federations is
a fact as no case received proper consideration with one case introduced by Mr.
Malinovsky (Estonia) receiving the Legal Committee▓s decision that the letter
could not be included into the report as it did not comply with established
requirements. This prompted a recommendation to еABA
President to write a letter to the Estonian Boxing Federation and ⌠express
concerns regarding the fact that the Estonian Boxing Federation and Referee
Association from time to time resorts to insulting methods of expressing their
discontent with еABA
and AIBA members■. Instead of investigation in good faith and a desire to
establish fair sports relations facilitating the achievement of high sports
results and the development of boxing as a popular and honest sport, Mr.
Doganeli, as an official holding three posts, takes liberty to recommend that
National European Associations urge their representatives to abstain from any
criticism regarding еABA
members, i.e. himself, as specific complaints were related to his name, and Mr.
Malinovsky▓s letter contained criticism of the current Secretary General who
repeatedly violates the AIBA Charter and Rules.
Along
with recommendations to avoid any criticism regarding National Federations, Mr.
Doganeli, as a high-ranking еABA
official, sends letters to national government and sports officials asking to
influence the people who he himself cannot influence. The evidence of it is the
letters sent by Mr. Doganeli to the Russian Olympic Committee, the Russian
Central Athletic Training Agency, Minister of Health Zurabov, Prime-Minister M.
Fradkov. Instead of conducting an internal investigation of the questions
provoking indignation and discontent in many National Associations and
correcting the situation inside the еABA,
Mr. Doganeli prefers to recommend to European national leaders that they change
the situation thus making the National Federations▓ representatives discuss
the details of such problems with their country leaders. In addition, Mr.
Doganeli forgets to mention that Russian authorities gave official answers in
their letters that investigations had been conducted and no evidence had been
found to corroborate the information given by Mr. Doganeli.
Mr.
Doganeli's statement made in the presence of Moldavian, Ukrainian and Estonian
representatives to Mr. Khusainov that Russia was not going to receive a single
gold medal in the Athens Olympic Games is known to many people √ but Mr.
Doganeli insists that it is a lie. Witnesses are called from among the people
who were not there or did not understand the language of conversation. However,
direct witnesses testify against Mr. Doganeli.
The
above-mentioned details could have remained just a controversy inside a European
sports organization, if Mr. Doganeli had not made them public.
Now this conflict is
a disgrace to the еABA
and the AIBA. An
official tasked with keeping order and honesty in his organization is involved
in intrigue on an international level ignoring anybody▓s remarks or proposals.
We
ask the end AIBA management
to step in and take drastic measures.
Otherwise, through Mr.
Doganeli▓s efforts we may lose what we have achieved in boxing through the
efforts of many generations and countries.
Eduard
R. Khusainov
President
Anatoly
S. Cherkasov
Executive
Director
Oleg
V. Zhadobin
Secretary
General