国际上诉法院回应布里亚托利偏见指控
FIA国际上诉法院发表声明，回应阿尔派高管弗拉维奥·布里亚托利指控摩纳哥大奖赛上诉案法官与迈凯伦有关联的说法，并为法官任命进行辩护和澄清。
国际汽联上诉法院回应弗拉维奥·布里亚托利的偏袒指控
国际汽联国际上诉法院发表声明，回应阿尔派高管布里亚托利关于摩纳哥大奖赛案中一名法官与迈凯伦有联系的指控。
在阿尔派领队布里亚托利指控其中一名法官与迈凯伦有关联后，国际上诉法院为摩纳哥大奖赛上诉案中法官的任命进行了辩护和澄清。
国际上诉法院独立于国际汽联运作，是裁决赛车运动相关事务的最高法院。在迈凯伦和红牛对赛会干事撤销阿尔派车手皮埃尔·加斯利摩纳哥大奖赛处罚的决定提出上诉后，该院被启动受理此案。
Gasly是在摩纳哥因维修区超速而被错误处罚的几名车手之一，他一度失去了领奖台位置，随后阿尔派发起了复审程序并获得成功。但由于其他车手已经服完处罚，与Gasly不同，他们无法撤销处罚，于是迈凯伦和红牛提起了上诉。
国际上诉法庭（ICA）支持了上诉方，恢复了Gasly的处罚，这让这位法国车手和他的阿尔派车队感到沮丧。但车队的高层老板Briatore在意大利大奖赛新闻发布会上发表了一番激烈的言论，把事情进一步升级，质疑评审小组的公正性，因为据称其中一名法官与迈凯伦有牵连。
涉事法官Filippo Marchino曾担任One Drop基金会的首席执行官，该基金会是由太阳马戏团创始人Guy Laliberte创办的慈善机构。在此职位期间，已故迈凯伦股东Mansour Ojjeh曾向该慈善机构赠送了几辆迈凯伦公路跑车，用于通过拍卖为慈善机构筹款。Briatore还提到了2018年迈凯伦 Special Operations在比佛利山庄举办的一场活动，Marchino曾作为演讲者出席，该活动与F1车队无关。
FIA国际上诉法庭发表声明回应Briatore的爆炸性指控，解释称评审法官小组是依照其司法程序组建的。
国际上诉法院（ICA）在评论中写道，针对迈凯伦与红牛上诉案：“FIA法庭已注意到有公开言论质疑审理ICA-2026-06-07-08-09号案件的合议庭法官的独立性和公正性。”
"FIA法庭希望明确表示，与其他任何案件一样，该案法官的任命和参与均是依照适用的FIA司法程序和惯例进行的，这些程序和惯例以最高标准为蓝本，例如《国际律师协会国际仲裁利益冲突指引》。"
"所有法官均由FIA大会选举产生，其中一些人是根据FIA章程由至少五支F1车队组成的小组提议而任命的。他们都须遵守FIA司法与纪律规则中规定的独立性和保密性要求，每年向FIA合规官披露利益情况，并针对每个具体案件，结合所涉问题和相关各方签署一份专门的独立性声明，该声明会送达各方当事人。"
ICA表示，在上诉听证会开始之前，没有任何人对合议庭的组成提出异议，并解释了为何其热衷于任命具有不同背景的法官。
声明继续说：“在听证会开始和结束时，双方均被邀请就诉讼程序或法庭组成提出任何问题。没有人这样做。”“听证会期间，没有任何人对法庭质询证人或进行诉讼的方式提出异议。
国际上诉法院（ICA）强调，组建由来自不同文化和地域背景的法官组成合议庭非常重要。这有助于确保评议和讨论反映多元的法律传统、观点和方法，进一步加强程序的公正性、独立性和可信度，以及获得公平审判的机会。
国际上诉法院补充说：“法院的裁决在其法律依据方面可能存在各种不同的解读和评论空间；这是公平的，也是所有法官都能接受的。法院对诉讼程序的稳妥性和法官的公正性充满信心。国际汽联（FIA）的法院始终致力于维护法官的独立性和公正性，以及司法程序的公正性。
意大利大奖赛——周六，图片集锦
英文原文
FIA's Court of Appeal responds to Flavio Briatore bias allegations
The FIA's International Court of Appeal issued a statement in response to Alpine executive Briatore's claims one of its judges in the Monaco GP case had McLaren links
The International Court of Appeal defended and clarified the appointment of its judges in the Monaco Grand Prix appeal amid allegations by Alpine boss Flavio Briatore that one of the judges had ties to McLaren.
The International Court of Appeal, which runs independently of the FIA, is the highest court judging over motorsport related matters and was called into action when McLaren and Red Bull appealed against the stewards' decision to rescind Alpine driver Pierre Gasly's Monaco Grand Prix penalties.
Gasly was one of several drivers incorrectly penalised in Monaco for pitlane speeding, initially losing his podium before Alpine launched a successful right of review procedure. But as other drivers had already served their penalties, unlike Gasly, they could not get their penalties rescinded, with McLaren and Red Bull launching an appeal.
The ICA agreed with the appellants and reinstated Gasly's penalties, frustrating the Frenchman and his Alpine squad. But the team's top boss Briatore took matters further when he launched an explosive rant during the Italian Grand Prix press conference, questioning the integrity of the panel because one judge was purported to have links with McLaren.
The judge in question, Filippo Marchino, served as CEO of the One Drop Foundation, a charity founded by Cirque du Soleil impresario Guy Laliberte. In that capacity, the charity was once gifted several McLaren road cars by late McLaren shareholder Mansour Ojjeh, for the purpose of raising money for the charity via auction. Briatore also referenced an event by McLaren Special Operations in Beverley Hills in 2018, where Marchino appeared as a speaker, an event unrelated to the F1 team.
The FIA's International Court of Appeal has issued a statement in response to Briatore's explosive allegations, explaining the panel of judges was put together in accordance with its judicial procedures.
"The FIA Courts are aware of public comments questioning the independence and impartiality of the judges of the panel that decided Case ICA-2026-06-07-08-09," the ICA commented, referring to the McLaren and Red Bull appeal.
"The FIA Courts wish to make clear that the appointment and participation of the judges in that case, like for any other case, were conducted in accordance with the applicable FIA judicial procedures and usual practice, which are inspired by the highest standards like the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration.
"All judges are elected by the FIA General Assemblies, some of them upon proposition of a group of at least five F1 teams in accordance with the FIA statutes. They are all subject to the independence and confidentiality requirements contained in the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, make annual disclosures of interests to the FIA compliance officer, and sign a specific declaration of independence for each particular case in consideration of the issue at stake and the parties involved, which is served to the parties."
The ICA said there were no objections to the composition of the panel before the appeal hearing started, and explained why it is keen to appoint judges with different backgrounds.
"At both the beginning and conclusion of the hearing, the parties were invited to raise any issue concerning the proceedings or the composition of the court. None did so," the statement continued. "No objection was raised during the hearing concerning the manner in which the court questioned the witness or conducted the proceedings.
"The ICA emphasises the importance of constituting panels with judges from different cultural and geographical backgrounds. This helps ensure that the deliberations and discussions reflect a diversity of legal traditions, perspectives and approaches, further strengthening the fairness, independence, credibility of the process and access to a fair trial."
The ICA added: "A court’s decision can leave room for various interpretations and comments as for its legal merits; that is fair and accepted by all the judges. The court is confident in the soundness of the proceedings and the integrity of the judges. The FIA courts remain committed to the independence and impartiality of their judges and to the integrity of the judicial process."
Italian Grand Prix - Saturday, in photos
Motorsport.com ·
内容来自公开信源，聚合内容版权归原作者与来源所有。