On November 15, 2024, the Aquatic Sports Association of Malta (ASA) Board of Appeals convened at the ASA headquarters to hear the appeal filed by Mr. Dean Bugeja against the disciplinary decision made by the Disciplinary Commissioner, Dr. Herman Mula, on November 1, 2024, concerning Bugeja’s case against Neptunes Waterpolo & Swimming Club. The appeal was lodged by Bugeja after he contested the Club’s behavior and sought a release from his contract with the club.
The central issue revolved around the application of the rules and whether the Commissioner had failed to properly consider all grounds of Forbidden Conduct as outlined in the World Aquatics Rules on Protection from Harassment and Abuse. Specifically, Bugeja argued that the behavior of the Club amounted to hazing and neglect, both of which, according to him, constituted harassment, even without repeated actions or the passage of time. In response, Bugeja requested that the Board either grant him an immediate release from his contract or allow him to transfer to another club on loan.
The Board of Appeals hearing was chaired by Dr. Zachary Sciberras and assisted by Mr. Kevin Azzopardi. Mr. George Farrugia, the General Secretary of the ASA, also attended the hearing as secretary to the Board. During the session, Bugeja was represented by his legal counsel, Dr. Anthony Galea, who presented the case in written form and elaborated on the arguments in person. Bugeja also testified, describing his claims of mistreatment and the toll it had taken on his mental well-being. The Club, represented by Dr. Adrian Delia and supported by Club President Mr. Matthew Bonello and Team Manager Mr. Rainer Scerri, presented their defense, emphasizing that the club had acted within its rights and had no intention of harming the Player.
The Board carefully considered the arguments put forth by both parties. The Player’s primary argument was that the Disciplinary Commissioner had applied the wrong clause in the Disciplinary Code and failed to take into account all forms of Forbidden Conduct. However, the Board concluded that the issue at hand was not the misapplication of rules, but rather the Commissioner’s interpretation of the relevant article. The Board determined that the Commissioner had applied the appropriate clause correctly but had interpreted the application of harassment and abuse in a manner different from that advocated by the Player.
Neptunes WPSC stood firm in its defense, arguing that, as the Player was still under contract for another year, the Club had the discretion to make decisions regarding his participation in matches and technical matters. The Club maintained that while its actions might be viewed as strict, they were not intended to be abusive and did not violate the principles of the World Aquatics Rules. The Club further argued that the Player’s request for immediate release was unreasonable, given his existing contractual obligations.
After deliberation, the Board of Appeals issued its decision. The Player’s appeal was rejected, and the Disciplinary Commissioner’s original decision was upheld in its entirety. The Board confirmed that the Player’s request for a free release from his contract was denied, meaning that Bugeja would remain contractually bound to the Club for the remainder of his term. However, the Board ruled that the Club must continue to allow the Player to train with the senior team until the expiration of his contract, as outlined in the initial decision.
Additionally, the Board clarified that Bugeja would not be required to pay any administrative fees for the appeal process. The decision marked the conclusion of a tense and closely contested case. While the Player’s claims of harassment were not upheld, the Board’s ruling allowed him to continue training with the senior team, preserving his professional development despite the ongoing contractual dispute.
The decision, which is final and cannot be appealed further, reaffirms the balance between protecting players’ rights and the club’s autonomy in managing its team. Neptunes WPSC was reminded that the directive to allow Bugeja to continue his training should be respected, ensuring that his professional growth was not hindered during the remaining period of his contract.
The ruling concluded a significant chapter in this ongoing matter and serves as a reminder of the importance of fair and transparent processes in resolving disputes within the sport.
