[splittist]

These are "FIFA Officials" in the same way that the representatives countries send to the UN are "UN Officials", or US Congressfolk are "US Officials". They aren't people who actually do the work at FIFA.

$150 million over 20 years for sports rights in Latin America seems to indicate pretty slim margins. I wonder what the deal was with bribes and kickbacks over the selection of the host country for the 2010 World Cup (i.e. South Africa)?

The defendants who have copped pleas are convicted of the made-up 'crimes' of e.g. "wire fraud conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy and the structuring of financial transactions". http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nine-fifa-officials-and-five-c...

No doubt terrible things go on among the members and their representatives at FIFA (as they do at the UN). Perhaps someone could explain how to organise an international federation that prevents corruption in its member (i.e. owner) organisations.

[ptaipale]

I don't quite understand how money laundering and fraud are "made up crimes". IMO they are very real crimes. If the convictions are wrong (i.e. not based on evidence), then say so, but claiming that crimes are "made up" is weasel language.

[splittist]

Money laundering is a recent invention as a crime. None of the actions involved are actually criminal in themselves, it's just that they (supposedly) make it harder for the authorities to detect something they might want to be obvious, to assist in the War on Drugs, or tax avoidance, or (more recently) terrorism.

As to "fraud", I actually referred to "wire fraud conspiracy", which is, more or less, once having had some sort of agreement (tacit or otherwise) to do something with a dishonest intention where a telephone was involved in some way or other. Note that you don't actually have to have followed through on that intention for the "crime" to have been committed.

These defendants plead guilty, so the convictions are no doubt correct. And no doubt many millions of bribes were paid. But I think a degree of skepticism about prosecutorial conduct is appropriate no matter what the supposed target of the prosecution.

[ptaipale]

Well, "recent" is relative. Modern money laundering procedures started to develop in 1920's and 1930's; the proceeds of crime were hidden with banking schemes, and Meyer Lansky eventually even bought a Swiss bank to help do it for the American mob.

But I would guess that already ancient Chinese criminal gangs did something similar, to make the proceeds of illegal activities appear legal.

[splittist]

Money laundering is old. Money laundering being its own stand-alone crime is recent.

(And part of the modern trend of criminalizing the living of one's life in a way not maximally transparent to the government.)

[splittist]

> I wonder what the deal was with bribes and kickbacks over the selection of the host country for the 2010 World Cup (i.e. South Africa)?

Answering my own question, having now skimmed the indictment, it seems to be the usual suspect taking money paid by the South African federation to the CFU for its support in the bid process - something which seems to be entirely legitimate - for himself (which isn't).

[jkot]

On world-cup FIFA saved hundreds of millions in Brazil, just from tax exemption. Total revenue was 4.5 billions.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/bodies/02/36/77...