CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

TAS 2023/A/9429 — Club Atlético Boca Juniors v. Confederación Sudamericana de Fútbol (CONMEBOL)

"Boca Juniors v. CONMEBOL" · CAS upheld CONMEBOL's USD 100,000 fine on Boca Juniors for racist gestures by fans at the 2022 Copa Libertadores.

What happened in Boca Juniors v. CONMEBOL

During the Copa Libertadores round-of-16 match on 28 June 2022 between Boca Juniors and Corinthians in São Paulo, four individuals in the visitors' stand assigned to Boca Juniors were detained by Brazilian authorities for allegedly making racist or discriminatory gestures toward Corinthians supporters. CONMEBOL opened disciplinary file CL.O 143-22 based on videos circulating in media and social networks. On 5 August 2022, CONMEBOL's Disciplinary Commission found Boca Juniors in breach of Article 17 of the CONMEBOL Disciplinary Code and imposed a USD 100,000 fine plus a ban on away fans for the club's next Copa Libertadores away match. Boca Juniors appealed; on 21 November 2022 CONMEBOL's Appeals Commission confirmed the sanction. Boca Juniors then appealed to CAS, arguing the videos were inauthentic, that one detainee was not a Boca fan, that the gestures were not racist, and that the fine increase from USD 30,000 to USD 100,000 (effected by Circular DCO 131/2022 on 9 May 2022, after the club signed its participation letter) violated proportionality, transparency and foreseeability. The Sole Arbitrator rejected all grounds, confirmed the discrimination findings across three videos, held the amended fine applicable under the conformity letter's broad acceptance clause, and dismissed the appeal in full. The case matters as a clear application of objective club liability for fan conduct and the enforceability of mid-tournament regulatory amendments accepted via participation letters.

Procedural history of TAS 2023/A/9429

In December 2021 Boca Juniors signed the conformity letter for the 2022 Copa Libertadores. On 9 May 2022 CONMEBOL issued Circular DCO 131/2022 raising the Article 17 minimum fine to USD 100,000. Following the 28 June 2022 match, CONMEBOL opened disciplinary file CL.O 143-22. On 5 August 2022 the CONMEBOL Disciplinary Commission found Boca Juniors liable under Article 17 and imposed a USD 100,000 fine and an away-fan ban for the next Copa Libertadores away match. Boca Juniors appealed on 7 October 2022. On 21 November 2022 the CONMEBOL Appeals Commission rejected the appeal and confirmed the sanction in full (the 'Appealed Decision'). Boca Juniors filed its CAS Statement of Appeal on 13 February 2023 under Articles R47 and R48 of the CAS Code, requesting provisional suspension of the Appealed Decision and submission to a sole arbitrator. CONMEBOL agreed to a sole arbitrator. On 29 March 2023 Boca Juniors withdrew its provisional-suspension request, stating the fan-ban sanction would be served on 6 April 2023. A videoconference hearing was held on 31 May 2023.

Key holdings in TAS 2023/A/9429

• Boca Juniors' fans in the visitors' stand committed discriminatory acts within the meaning of Article 17 of the CONMEBOL Disciplinary Code, making the club objectively liable under Article 9 of that Code.
• The location of an individual in the stand assigned to a club, combined with the club's sale of tickets for that sector, is sufficient under the objective-observer standard to classify that individual as a supporter of that club, even if the individual claims allegiance to another team.
• By signing the conformity letter Boca Juniors accepted not only the regulations in force at that date but also all future circulars and decisions of CONMEBOL and its organs, making Circular DCO 131/2022 binding on the club.
• The USD 100,000 fine is the minimum sanction prescribed by the amended Article 17 and is proportionate, representing approximately 10% of the minimum prize money received by Boca Juniors for the 2022 Copa Libertadores and less than 5% of total tournament income.
• A prior sanction need not be final (res judicata) for recidivism under Article 31 of the CONMEBOL Disciplinary Code to be established, since CAS appeals do not automatically suspend the effect of appealed decisions.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Sole Arbitrator first confirmed the authenticity of the three videos: witness Palazzo admitted he appeared in Video 2 and identified Lizárraga in Video 1; Video 3 circulated publicly and was admissible under Article 62 of the Disciplinary Code. On the substance, the arbitrator applied the objective-observer test from CAS jurisprudence: Lizárraga was in the Boca-assigned stand, surrounded by Boca-clad supporters, and Boca sold the away tickets — his self-serving denial of Boca allegiance was rejected as unreliable given the context. For Video 2, Palazzo's own admission of 'disrespectful' gestures, combined with the arbitrator's direct viewing, confirmed simian imitation constituting racism, corroborated by Corinthians fans audibly calling him 'racist' and summoning police. For Video 3, a single fleeting gesture sufficed; police detention was not required. On the fine, the arbitrator held that the conformity letter's broad acceptance clause covered post-signature circulars; the challenge to the Council's decision to amend Article 17 was outside the scope of this appeal. Proportionality was satisfied because USD 100,000 was the statutory minimum and a small fraction of tournament earnings. Foreseeability was satisfied because approximately six weeks elapsed between the circular and the match, and Boca had already been sanctioned under the new rate before 28 June 2022. Mitigating factors were rejected because the anti-racism campaigns were themselves the execution of prior CONMEBOL sanctions, not voluntary measures.

Why Boca Juniors v. CONMEBOL matters in CAS jurisprudence

The award reinforces that clubs bear strict objective liability for fan discrimination under CONMEBOL rules and that a conformity letter accepting future circulars and decisions binds a club to mid-tournament regulatory amendments. It also clarifies that the objective-observer test for fan identity is not rebutted merely by a detainee's self-serving denial, and that a single fleeting discriminatory gesture — even by an unidentified, undetained individual — suffices to trigger Article 17 liability.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2015/A/3874 CAS 2007/A/1217

Frequently asked questions about Boca Juniors v. CONMEBOL

Why was Boca Juniors fined USD 100,000 and not the lower USD 30,000 rate that was in force when they signed the Copa Libertadores participation letter?

CONMEBOL issued Circular DCO 131/2022 on 9 May 2022, raising the Article 17 minimum fine to USD 100,000 before the 28 June 2022 match. The Sole Arbitrator held that Boca Juniors' conformity letter expressly accepted all future circulars and decisions of CONMEBOL and its organs, so the amended rate was binding. The arbitrator also noted that approximately six weeks elapsed between the circular and the match, and that Boca had already been sanctioned at the new rate in a separate proceeding before the match took place.

How did CAS determine that José Rolando Lizárraga was a Boca Juniors supporter even though he claimed to support Club Atlético Tucumán?

Applying the objective-observer standard drawn from CAS 2007/A/1217, the Sole Arbitrator found that Lizárraga was seated in the stand exclusively assigned to Boca Juniors, surrounded by supporters wearing Boca kit, and that Boca Juniors itself had sold all away tickets for that sector — confirmed by security official Gilberto Velasco Ramírez and witness Palazzo. The arbitrator rejected Lizárraga's video denial as unreliable given the circumstances, noting that his presence in the Boca stand was only explicable if he attended to support the visiting team.

Did Boca Juniors' anti-racism campaigns and internal disciplinary measures count as mitigating factors to reduce the fine?

No. The Sole Arbitrator found that the anti-racism campaigns cited by Boca Juniors were themselves the execution of prior CONMEBOL disciplinary sanctions imposed in earlier proceedings, not voluntary preventive measures. Because the USD 100,000 fine was already the statutory minimum under Article 17, there was no room to reduce it further, and the arbitrator concluded that Article 30.3 mitigating factors had been properly considered and correctly rejected by the CONMEBOL Appeals Commission.

Does a prior CONMEBOL sanction need to be final before it can be used to establish recidivism under Article 31 of the CONMEBOL Disciplinary Code?

No. The Sole Arbitrator held that a CAS appeal does not automatically suspend the effect of the appealed decision unless the relevant arbitral panel so orders. Boca Juniors failed to demonstrate that any prior sanction had been revoked, so recidivism under Article 31 was properly established even though those earlier decisions were still under appeal at the time of the Appealed Decision.

Topics: Doping, ethics & governance at CAS

Source: official award. This digest was generated by LexXi from the full award text and machine-verified against it — every figure, article and citation above appears in the source. It is an editorial summary, not legal advice. See how ElevenLex verification works.