The International Court of Appeal has responded to Flavio Briatore’s accusations regarding a possible conflict of interest. It assures that all procedures have been respected.
Read more Isack Hadjar officially takes his podium in Monaco: «It’s even more satisfying»
The controversy surrounding Pierre Gasly’s podium in Monaco takes a new dimension. After the serious accusations made on Friday by Flavio Briatore against one of the judges of the International Court of Appeal, the judicial bodies of the FIA have decided to publicly break their silence.
In a detailed statement, the Court defends the independence and impartiality of its judges and recalls the numerous procedures put in place to prevent conflicts of interest. It especially emphasizes that none of the parties involved in the case, including Alpine, had challenged the composition of the panel before, during, or at the end of the hearing.
A direct response to the suspicions expressed by Briatore in Monza.
Briatore had directly targeted a judge
The case originates from the two five-second penalties imposed on Gasly for infractions related to his speed in the pit lane during the Monaco Grand Prix.
Alpine had obtained their cancellation following a right of review, allowing the Frenchman to recover his third place. McLaren and Red Bull then challenged this decision before the International Court of Appeal.
The latter ultimately reinstated Gasly’s penalties, who was demoted to seventh position. Isack Hadjar thus recovered his third place.
Alpine had initially indicated disagreement with the verdict while affirming respect for it. But Briatore then considerably toughened his tone in Monza by personally targeting the judge Filippo Marchino, a member of the panel in charge of the case.
Alleged links with McLaren at the heart of the accusations
Alpine’s executive advisor notably reproached Marchino for his attitude during the hearing, claiming he behaved like a “prosecutor” and was “very unpleasant”.
However, Briatore explained that his main issue concerned alleged links between the judge and McLaren. He specifically mentioned Marchino’s presence at an event held in 2018 in Beverly Hills in which McLaren Special Operations had participated.
Briatore also claims to have a photograph showing Marchino with a McLaren and publicly questioned his impartiality.
It should be noted, however, that McLaren Special Operations is the division dedicated to road cars, their customization, and maintenance. It is distinct from the Formula 1 team. Moreover, no evidence has established that the links mentioned by Briatore influenced the Court’s decision.
Marchino has not yet publicly responded to these accusations.
The Court defends its selection procedure
Faced with the scale of the controversy, the FIA’s judicial bodies recalled that the appointment of judges had been carried out in accordance with the procedures in force.
“The FIA judicial bodies are aware of public comments questioning the independence and impartiality of the judges on the panel who ruled on the ICA-2026-06-07-08-09 case”, the statement says.
The Court specifies that the procedures used are inspired notably by international standards regarding conflicts of interest in arbitration.
All judges are elected by the FIA General Assembly, some may be proposed by a group composed of at least five Formula 1 teams. They are also subject to the rules of independence and confidentiality provided by the judicial and disciplinary regulations of the Federation.
Mandatory declarations of interests
The Court also details several mechanisms intended to prevent conflicts of interest.
Each judge must annually submit a declaration of their interests to the FIA compliance officer. A specific declaration of independence must also be signed for each case, taking into account the subject matter and the different parties involved.
Read more Cadillac heavily penalized at Monza: FIA now threatens sporting penalties
This declaration is then communicated to the concerned parties.
The Court thus assures that the usual procedure was followed in the Gasly case and that no element had led to questioning the presence of the selected judges.
Alpine had raised no objection
This is probably the most important part of the response. The Court recalls that all parties had explicitly had the opportunity to challenge the composition of the panel.
“At the beginning as well as at the conclusion of the hearing, the parties were invited to raise any questions concerning the procedure or the composition of the Court. None did.”
Moreover, no objection was raised regarding the way the judges questioned witnesses or conducted the hearing.
“No objection was raised during the hearing regarding the way the Court questioned the witness or conducted the procedure”, the statement insists.
This clarification places Alpine in a delicate position since Briatore’s criticisms appeared publicly after the unfavorable verdict for the French team.
McLaren had reacted strongly
Andrea Stella did not wait for the Court’s statement to respond to Briatore. Present alongside the Italian during the press conference in Monza, the McLaren director had called the insinuations made against his team “insulting”.
Stella had also warned that anyone making such serious accusations in a public setting must be ready to defend them.
McLaren considers that the hearing was conducted according to the highest standards and refuses to have its reputation associated with the idea of a biased procedure.
The Court’s official response now reinforces this position by explicitly defending the integrity of the entire process.
The Court maintains its confidence in its judges
The statement also recalls the importance of constituting panels composed of judges from different cultures, regions, and legal traditions. This diversity should allow, according to the Court, to strengthen fairness and credibility of decisions.
The officials acknowledge that a verdict can perfectly be challenged on legal grounds and give rise to different interpretations. However, they establish a clear distinction between criticizing a decision and questioning the integrity of the people who made it.
“The Court is convinced of the robustness of the procedure and of the integrity of the judges”, concludes the statement.
The declaration is co-signed by Laurent Anselmi, president of the International Court of Appeal, Rui Botica Santos, president of the International Tribunal, as well as Waltraud Wünsch and Gérard Martin, vice-presidents respectively of the two jurisdictions.
While Gasly himself states that the case “is not going to stop here” and Briatore acknowledges considering a possible new approach, the Court has just sent a particularly firm message: it accepts that its verdict be debated, but rejects any questioning of the independence and integrity of its judges.
Read more FP3 at Monza: Russell strikes hard ahead of Hamilton and Verstappen before qualifying