What’s next in World Cup bid corruption case?

GENEVA — Russia and Qatar appear to be the big winners on the day American prosecutor Michael Garcia lost his appeal against FIFA.

Garcia, a former US Attorney, had objected to ethics judge Joachim Eckert’s summary of his World Cup bid investigation into the 2018 and 2022 hosting votes, claiming there were “numerous materially incomplete and erroneous representations” of his report.

The appeals committee of football’s governing body ruled Tuesday that Garcia was unable to challenge Eckert’s summary because they were only Eckert’s opinions.

The German judge’s summary “does not constitute a decision... and as such is neither legally binding nor appealable,” FIFA said Tuesday in a statement.

Still, Garcia’s loss does not necessarily end the World Cup bid corruption case, nor finally dispel doubts about the integrity of a vote which chose Russia and Qatar as the next two hosts.

It did, however, signal a difficult week ahead for those seeking reforms within FIFA as Sepp Blatter and his executive committee gather in Morocco for a two-day session starting Thursday.

The main business for Blatter and the executive committee in Marrakech on Friday is deciding what to do with Garcia’s investigation report.

Is it strong enough to justify keeping the corruption case open? And how much of Garcia’s 430-page dossier should be published when the FIFA Code of Ethics demands that it stays sealed?

When Garcia and Eckert met for peace talks at FIFA headquarters in Zurich, they agreed to involve Domenico Scala, the Swiss-Italian pharmaceutical executive who chairs FIFA’s audit and compliance committee.

Scala must decide how much of it he will present to the 27-member FIFA executive committee.

Blatter’s ruling committee should then decide if the case against bid candidates — also including much-criticised bids from Australia and England — has anywhere to go.

In a separate discussion, the FIFA board will debate publishing the Garcia report — a document which has a sure place in FIFA lore given how critics have clamoured for its release.

Some board members believe FIFA needs to publish Garcia’s work in full to have a chance of restoring shattered public faith in football’s traditionally secretive governing body.

Garcia himself has called for “appropriate publication” — getting key evidence out in the public domain while redacting names to protect some of the 75 witnesses who cooperated with his two-year probe.

That view is supported by Michel Platini, who as president of UEFA is a FIFA vice president, even though veteran European officials are in Garcia’s crosshairs.

Publication could fuel public disquiet at the choice of Russia and Qatar by a widely discredited FIFA executive committee which, in December 2010, contained several now disgraced members.

Or it could hit Garcia’s own reputation if some allegations which have been widely reported were not nailed.