Human Rights On and Off the Pitch:
FIFA’s Responsibility to Set a Precedent
By Danial Golforoush
As soccer continues to struggle in the fight against racism on and off the pitch (including on social media), a necessary and vital controversy has taken hold of sports media once again.
The Qatar World Cup Controversy
New reports confirm that more than 6,500 migrant workers have died in Qatar during the building of the infrastructure for the 2022 FIFA World Cup since the country was selected as the host more than a decade ago. In light of this news and the constant fight of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other institutions, the latest FIFA World Cup Qualifiers in March 2021 created a platform for fans, players, football associations, and teams to take a stand. On March 24, 2021, the Norway National Football Team players wore “Human Rights On and Off the Pitch” t-shirts to express concern about the 2022 FIFA World Cup and Qatar’s human rights record ahead of their qualifying match against the Gibraltar National Football Team. Since that night, Germany and the Netherlands have joined the cause as well. There have also been rumors that some teams or players may boycott the tournament if their team qualifies for it. It is important to mention that there were calls for boycotts back in 2013 as well, as many teams rightfully linked the selection of Qatar and FIFA’s corrupt regime at the time.
There is no doubt that FIFA’s corruption at the time (which has since been made public) is the direct cause of the selection of Qatar. This corruption has not only led to thousands of deaths, but a complete restructuring of the soccer calendar (as the games will be played during the winter to avoid the oppressive heat of a Qatari summer) and many other questionable outcomes. Therefore, the matter of host selection and related decisions will need reform. However, there are more important and immediate questions at hand: What now? What needs to be done? Why have the migrant workers been treated so poorly? And, more importantly, how can soccer and FIFA avoid such issues in the future? Why should FIFA set the precedent?
The Problematic Qatari System
Since the moment in 2010 when Qatar was announced as the 2022 FIFA World Cup host nation—beating the likes of the United States, Australia, South Korea, and Japan in the process—FIFA’s choice raised many eyebrows. Qatar will become the first country from the Middle East region and only the second country from Asia to host the games since Japan and South Korea’s joint venture in 2002. While bribery, corruption, the heat, the new calendar, Qatar’s lack of infrastructure, and—even worse—its human rights record were the main talking points, some NGOs had already started the conversation on the prevention of the potential exploitation of migrant workers in the upcoming years. There have always been questions regarding Qatar and other Persian Gulf nations’ sponsorship programs.
Qatar, like many other Persian Gulf states, utilizes the Kafala System—a sponsorship system which monitors migrant workers who are often recruited strategically from the lower socio-economic status citizens of developing nations in Central Asia. Due to a lack of fundamental and universal labor rights, this system has been described by Amnesty International and other NGOs as forced labor and modern-day slavery. An exit visa prevents the workers from leaving the country before confirming with their employer. The exit visa, lack of wage payment, and horrendous work and living conditions were exposed by The Guardian seven years ago. Since then, Qatar has removed the exit visa and created a digital wage payment platform; however, there are still reports of unpaid labor and unacceptable working and living environments for these migrant workers.
Migrant Abuse in the Qatari FIFA Tournament Construction
February 2021 reports from The Guardian and Amnesty International regarding Qatari preparations for the 2022 World Cup reveal horrifying statistics. Per the report from The Guardian, the data compiled from government sources discloses an average of 12 deaths per week since the announcement of Qatar as the nation host. “Data from India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka revealed there were 5,927 deaths of migrant workers in the period 2011–2020. Separately, data from Pakistan’s embassy in Qatar reported a further 824 deaths of Pakistani workers, between 2010 and 2020.” Notably, the number of deaths is expected to be a lot higher since many of the countries with a smaller number of migrant workers in Qatar do not gather any data on migrant deaths.
In a statement in March 2016, Amnesty International’s then-Secretary General Salil Shetty stated that: “The abuse of migrant workers is a stain on the conscience of world football. For players and fans, a World Cup stadium is a place of dreams. For some of the workers who spoke to us, it can feel like a living nightmare.”
Qatari Authorities have complained that Qatar has been put under immense and unprecedented pressure even though Qatar has exceeded expectations in regards to the efficiency in building new stadiums and infrastructure to accommodate the needs of the World Cup and its fans. In a November 2019 CNN interview, Nasser Al Khater, the chief executive of the 2022 Qatar FIFA World Cup, displayed his irritation at the scrutiny that his country has been under by saying that Qatar “has been treated unfairly.” He also mentioned that the Qatari Authorities were proven innocent by three different governing bodies and investigations. However, he did not deny that there have been multiple deadly and high-stakes mistakes that have been made, which have been allocated new resources.
FIFA’s Responsibility to Human Rights
The system of human rights abuse in Qatar, whose construction project directly benefits FIFA, is just one of the many stains that world football has on its conscience. Almost every tournament, every season, and every match brings in its own controversies and rights violations, known to even the most casual spectator; the constant blatant systematic and in-person racism faced by black players throughout the world, the forced relocation of thousands of settlers of favelas for construction of new world cup stadiums, or the doping scandal during the world cup hosted by Russia are just a few examples of the many stains on international soccer’s character. And FIFA has blessed them all.
The FIFA World Cup brings in more than half the population of the world every four years in viewership. WIth that incredible spotlight comes an incredible power, authority, and responsibility to challenge the status quo and right wrongs. Because of its unique position and unmatched global reach, international soccer reflects and highlights the issues that it involves itself with. However, since growth, power, and money are so intertwined, we are often left with a complex set of decisions to make.
Human decency and rights are often sacrificed for money and other business-related ventures, yet FIFA and other soccer institutions, in general, have the reach and potential to set a new precedent and fresh take on contemporary social and economic dilemmas. There needs to be a more proactive and intuitive force utilized by these soccer governing bodies to ensure that the potential opportunity of hosting games will come with its own obligations; it is only fair to ask for a living wage and higher environmental and social actions from the hosts. There is no doubt about the complexity and difficulty of the task ahead for international soccer, but there is an obvious need to prioritize the human over the ball and the money. At the end of the day, a boycotted tournament is not a well-remembered one.
Soccer possesses an extraordinary global reach that cuts across different cultures, languages, and physical borders; thus, ultimately, it has the responsibility to set a precedent for other global events and institutions. With a younger, ever-changing, and more socially-aware fandom, soccer will need to reconsider its practices and stance by implementing long-term and robust plans for the present and the future of the sport. Instead of owning the status quo, it ought to walk its talk and own this challenge.
