布里亚托雷发布会炮轰法官 阿尔派摩纳哥领奖台案前景成疑
在国际汽联上诉法院撤销阿尔派车手加斯利的摩纳哥站领奖台资格后，车队执行顾问弗拉维奥·布里亚托雷在新闻发布会上矛头直指其中一名法官。
周五，阿尔派 高级顾问 Flavio Briatore 掀起了近来最具爆炸性的 F1 新闻发布会之一，起因是 FIA 国际上诉法院的裁决剥夺了该车队的摩纳哥大奖赛领奖台。
就在 FIA 公布裁决——迈凯伦 和 红牛 针对恢复 加斯利 蒙特卡洛前三名成绩的上诉败诉——几个小时后，Briatore 发起了攻势。
但他并没有批评法官们得出的结论，而是特别把矛头指向其中一位法官，暗示他与 迈凯伦 有关联。
"Filippo Marchino 是一名法官，他在听证会上非常恶劣，表现得像个检察官，"Briatore 一边念着手中的稿纸一边说道。
"后来，我们发现了这个人为什么这么恶劣的原因。他和迈凯伦关系非常密切。"
Briatore说，他觉得这种情况"非常不公平"。
他还说："我们有这个人在2018年于Beverly Hills的MSO为迈凯伦演讲时的一张照片"，尽管他并没有出示那张纸。
"他有一个基金会，叫做One Drop Foundation，而迈凯伦送了两三辆迈凯伦汽车，"Briatore补充道。"这非常不公平。"
关于这些赛车的这一说法，具体与2019年为One Drop基金会举行的一场慈善拍卖会有关，Marchino是该基金会的董事会成员。
One Drop由太阳马戏团联合创始人Guy Laliberte创立，他长期以来与迈凯伦关系密切，是前迈凯伦掌门人Ron Dennis的朋友。
因此，该基金会从迈凯伦获得拍品，作为Briatore所提到的慈善拍卖的一部分，是有明确逻辑的。
Briatore的言论不仅令FIA和在场的媒体感到意外，显然也激怒了迈凯伦车队领队Andrea Stella，对于暗示其中存在任何不正当行为的说法，他作出了愤怒的回应。
斯特拉说："我发现这场会议朝这个方向发展，对迈凯伦来说相当侮辱，对一个值得高度尊重的车队的名誉来说也是如此。"
"如果有人提出这类指控——这些指控看起来相当严重——他们将必须为自己在公开场合所说的话承担责任。"
"听证会，整个国际上诉法院，都是以最高标准进行的，我们不应该像已经发生的那样质疑这一阶段。"
不过，布里亚托利暗示此事并未结束，他暗示阿尔派可能会考虑将此事进一步推进。
“我们一直在考虑这件事，”他说。“先过了这个周末，之后我们再考虑。目前，我还不知道。”
阿尔派（阿尔派）究竟有哪些可选方案并不清楚，因为国际汽联（FIA）国际上诉法院是最高权威机构——各方无法对其裁决提出上诉。
不过，存在一项与常规干事裁决类似的重审权利，即如果发现任何“在国际上诉法院案件开始时未知的重要新证据”，相关决定可以受到质疑。
布里亚托利暗示，阿尔派（阿尔派）在听证会结束之前对这些所谓联系一无所知。
"我们是在会议之后，按逻辑推论才得知的，而不是在会议之前，"他说。"我们查明这个人与迈凯伦车队有关联。"
目前尚不清楚布里亚托利所说的这一新信息是否足以达到申请复审的门槛，因为国际汽联上周五明确表示，评审团的组成要经过严格的审查程序。
国际上诉法庭拥有一份由36位顶尖法律专家组成的名单，每次案件会从其中至少选出八人组成一个候选池。
这个候选池会提前充分告知相关各方，以便各方判断是否存在"严重且客观的理由认为名单上的任何或全部法官因利益冲突或其他正当理由而应予回避"。
在这整个过程中，阿尔派 始终没有对入围法官的人选提出任何异议，这意味着 ICA 主席——摩纳哥的 Laurent Anselmi——得以继续推进并为听证会选定了四名法官。
有趣的是，根据 F1 规则，在与世界锦标赛相关的 ICA 听证会中，至少一名法官必须是应至少五支车队或三家制造商的提议，在 FIA 大会上被选入法官库的。
早在 2023 年，以及同样担任摩纳哥上诉听证会法官的就是由车队提名后，在 FIA 大会上获得任命的。
由车队提名的任何法官都要接受 FIA 合规官的尽职调查，随后由一个特别小组进行审查，之后才会向资格审查委员会提出建议。
除了这项初步评估之外，当评委被指派到具体案件时，他们必须向国际汽联（FIA）秘书长确认自己不受任何利益冲突的影响。
只有在这一步完成后，国际上诉法院（ICA）评审团的最终组成才会确定下来，并且对与案件有关的所有人保密，直到听证会当天才公布。
随着听证会结束和国际上诉法院裁决的出炉，F1围场还需要再等一等，看看围绕摩纳哥大奖赛领奖台长达三个月的争斗是否还会进一步延续。
英文原文
Alpine executive advisor Flavio Briatore stirred up one of the most explosive Formula 1 press conferences of recent times on Friday amid the fall out of the FIA International Court of Appeal verdict that took away his team's Monaco Grand Prix podium.
Just a few hours after the FIA published the verdict that McLaren and Red Bull's had been successful in their appeal against Pierre Gasly having his Monte Carlo top-three finish reinstated, Briatore went on the offensive.
But rather than criticise the conclusions the judges had come to, he took aim at one of them in particular in suggesting that he had links with McLaren.
"Filippo Marchino is a judge, he was very nasty during the hearing, was acting as a prosecutor," said Briatore as he read off a piece of paper in his hand.
"And after, we found out what is the reason why so nasty, this guy. He is very linked with McLaren."
Briatore said that he felt the situation was "very unfair".
He added "we have a nice picture of this guy at a speech for McLaren in 2018 in MSO, Beverly Hills", although without showing the piece of paper.
"He has a foundation, it's called One Drop Foundation, and McLaren gave two, three McLaren cars," Briatore added. "This was quite unfair."
This remark about the cars specifically is linked to a charity auction that was held in 2019 for the One Drop Foundation, of which Marchino sits on the board of directors.
One Drop was created by Guy Laliberte, the co-founder of Cirque du Soleil, who has long had ties to McLaren as a friend of former McLaren supremo Ron Dennis.
So, there is clear logic in it obtaining items from McLaren as part of the charity auction that Briatore referenced.
Briatore's remarks not only took the FIA and the media present by surprise, but they clearly infuriated McLaren team principal Andrea Stella, who gave an angry response to suggestions that there was anything untoward at play.
"I find that this conference going in this direction is quite insulting for McLaren, for the reputation of a team that deserves a lot of respect," said Stella.
"If anybody makes these kind of allegations - which seem quite serious - they are going to have to take the responsibility for what they are saying in a public forum.
"The hearing, the whole International Court of Appeal, was conducted to the highest standards and we should not question this phase like it’s been done."
Briatore suggested that the matter was not closed though, as he hinted that Alpine might considering taking the matter further.
"We’ve been thinking about it," he said. "Just pass the weekend and after that we think about it. For the moment, I don’t know."
Quite what Alpine's options could be is unclear, because the FIA's International Court of Appeal is the highest authority - and parties cannot appeal what it decides.
However, there is a right of review element that is similar to normal stewards' verdicts where decisions can be challenged if any "important new evidence is discovered which was unknown at the outset of the case before the ICA".
Briatore suggested Alpine knew nothing about the alleged links until after the hearing.
"We found out, after the meeting, logically, not before," he said. "We found out this guy was linked with the McLaren team."
It is unclear if what Briatore said is new information would be enough to cross the threshold for a right of review, because the FIA made clear on Friday that the make-up of the judging panel is put through a strong vetting process.
The International Court of Appeal has a roster of 36 leading legal experts, with at least eight of them selected to be part of a pool that can be picked for each case.
This pool is communicated to relevant parties well ahead of time to see if there are any "serious and objective reasons to consider that any or all of the shortlisted judges should be recused due to the existence of a conflict of interest or other legitimate grounds".
At no point in this process did Alpine offer any objection about who the shortlisted judges were, and that meant the president of the ICA - Monaco's Laurent Anselmi - went ahead and selected four for the hearing.
Interestingly, as part of F1's regulations, at least one of the judges involved in an ICA hearing that relates to the world championship must have been elected to the pool at the FIA's general assembly on proposal from at least five teams or three manufacturers.
Back in 2023, Marchino (as well as Luigi Fumagalli, who was also a judge in the Monaco appeal hearing) was nominated at the FIA's general assembly after being proposed by teams.
Any judges proposed by teams are subject to a due diligence check by the FIA compliance officer, and are then reviewed by an ad hoc panel before recommendations are made to the eligibility assessment committee.
Beyond this initial assessment, when judges are called up to specific cases they must confirm to the FIA's secretary general that they are not affected by any conflict of interest.
Only once this is complete will the final make-up of the ICA judging panel be finalised, with it then kept secret from everyone involved in the case until the day of the hearing.
With the hearing finished and the ICA verdict now out, the F1 paddock must wait a little longer to see if a three-month fight over the Monaco GP podium is prolonger further still.
The Race ·
内容来自公开信源，聚合内容版权归原作者与来源所有。