Saturday
Mar282020
Radjabov: "I Should Consult a Lawyer"
Saturday, March 28, 2020 at 2:45AM
And who could blame him? I have no idea if a lawsuit would pass legal muster, and if any court would have the power to compel FIDE to pay him or offer some other sort of compensation, but at least morally his position seems plausible. Any legal eagles out there want to weigh in?
HT: Daniel Parmet
tagged 2020 Candidates, COVID-19, Teimour Radjabov
Reader Comments (5)
I know it's not fashionable, but I don't have much sympathy with Radjabov's position. It wasn't obviously a mistake for FIDE to go ahead with the Candidates. There is and has been so much uncertainty about Covid-19. Just look at how frequently governments with access to top advice have been revising their policies and working models.
When it did go ahead, the conditions were unusual, but they were the same for everyone. The Candidates isn't about selecting the best of everyone bar the world champion. For that one might as well just go by rating. It's a sporting contest designed so that whoever wins it can be considered a worthy challenger to the champion. It might have required mental fortitude of a different kind this year, but it hasn't failed in its overall purpose thus far. Even if some kind of fairness consideration suggests that Radjabov should be parachuted in whenever the conditions become sufficiently benign, the unfairness of that towards the other candidates who have already gone through so much (& revealed their prep) seems to me to be much greater.
[DM: Maybe...but I think the conditions of uncertainty (although they didn't seem particularly uncertain to me - I've been expecting worldwide disaster since early February and quarantine/self-quarantine conditions shortly thereafter) are exactly the reason to not have the event. We may also disagree somewhat about the purpose of the Candidates, although I'm not sure about that. I'd say that there is no abstract method that guarantees that one finds the best challenger for the world champion. A player's rating is a function of many things, and doesn't necessarily tell us who the strongest player is at the moment. (Just ask all the adults with stagnant or falling ratings losing to underrated, up-and-coming kids at practically every non-professional tournament everywhere.) The Candidates is - excepting the wildcard - an attempt to bring in the "best" players as measured by multiple metrics.
In the end, all this is for the courts to decide, but it would be better if FIDE and Radjabov just worked out some sort of deal. We've all got more important things to worry about than this.]
Not a lawyer, however, I do know that FIDE is required to answer to the Sports court of Switzerland in Lausanne which ks where any legal proceedings would take place. I have no idea what they would award Radjabov ... ? A place in the candidates? Money? A forced nulling of the current tournament? Either way, FIDE is legally bound by this court.
Either way, it is better for FIDE and Radjabov to work it out without wasting money on lawyers.
As for if it does go to court... FIDE will be dead in the water.
The Russian minsitry of sport declared a pandemic on the 15th of March stating all sporting events in Russia should be stopped immediately.
At no point did Russia consult medical experts.
FIDE issued a harsh ultimatum to Radjabov that wouldn't hold up to any court anywhere.
The players themselves obviously weren't playing full strength and alluded to distraction but also duress. Wang Hao mentioned several times he felt he was forced to play against his will.
A difficult situation for all parties, but I doubt there's an actual legal case for Radjabov, at least not one that all the players couldn't also try to make, namely that being compelled to play under present circumstances is wrong. But is there a legal argument here? In the absence of any actual harm, not likely. And since Radjabov withdrew, I suspect that he probably has less of a case than those who took the risk and played.
It's a nice surprise to have some posts to read.
[DM: Re the last comment, you're welcome. Pass on the word that I'm posting!
Whether he has a legal case is unclear, but there's certainly harm: while he and Sergey Karjakin are friends, the sort of assistance he and Radjabov's other helpers would have been offering the past few months would not have been pro bono. There may also have been other costs, including events Radjabov might have skipped and, if he does any work as a trainer, lessons he might have forsaken. There's also the prize money he forfeited, though whether that counts is again something for the courts to decide.]
OK, I take your point. Radjabov has suffered economically. The participants likely have too. But since Radjabov withdrew (admittedly under duress), I think his case is less powerful than the players who took part. I would imagine, however, that the participants (but not Radjabov) are receiving at least partial remuneration. Hopefully Radjabov and FIDE will forego the courts and come to some mutually acceptable compensation for his economic loss.
This Radjabov issue is getting way too much attention. He declined to participate in the candidates process. Nobody guaranteed him that the tournament would or would not be uninterrupted. In the end it was interrupted, but so what? The others did what it took to play half the games, clearly a material part of the contest. Starting the event as scheduled was not an illegitimate act on the part of FIDE, and adjourning it does not make it so.
[DM: It's not getting too much attention. It's the Candidates tournament, the second-most important chess event there is. (And are you overwhelmed by all the other chess activity going on? :)) It's major news to have a player withdraw, and as Radjabov is the one who is talking about suing, that too is news. It would be bizarre for a site that at least tries to keep up with chess news not to cover it. As for the merits of the case, we'll see. It's not obvious to me that Radjabov's concerns about safety weren't well-founded, and even if the organizers developed satisfactory plans for the players' safety, even then he might have a case (e.g., if they failed to adequately express those plans). (And given that there were over 1000 spectators present at the opening ceremony, it's hard to be convinced that the organizers were adequately concerned.)]