French National team player Nikola Karabatic and German Christian Schwarzer have endorsed Jean Kaiser in his bid for IHF President. Karabatic is widely considered the world’s best current handball player and led the French National team to Gold in the Beijing Olympics and the 2009 World Championships this past January. He also plays for Kiel in the German Bundesliga. Schwarzer, one of the best circle runners of all time was a key member of Germany’s 2007 World Championship team and currently plays for Rhein-Neckar Lowen.

Both players are listed as supporting Kaiser in a YouTube video which features former French National team player Jackson Richardson meeting with Jean Kaiser and expressing his personal support for his candidacy. Richardson speaks in French in the video which is accessible here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt3KJCq2bYg

The Associated Press (AP) has written an article on the upcoming IHF election and it was published in several newspapers including the USA Today. The article contains quotes from Peter Muehlematter, Christer Ahl and Hassan Moustafa. The article quotes Moustafa as predicting victory based on "solidarity, collaboration and trust" with the IHF's 159 members.

Associated Press (AP): Officials push for ouster of handball president: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2009-05-28-1980126860_x.htm

In related news, multiple Germany news outlets have reported on elements contained in the Christer Ahl interview.

In the first part of the interview Christer Ahl discussed the fundamental problems with IHF Management. In this, the second and final part of the interview, Ahl discusses the alleged misdeeds which have been previously reported.

John Ryan (JR): Let's discuss some of the officiating allegations that are frequently mentioned. The Sport Arbitration Court’s (CAS) report on Asian Olympic Qualification implies that Dr Moustafa purposely side-stepped the Playing Rules and Competition (PRC) Committee in the replacement of the German refs with the inexperienced Jordanian refs for the Kuwait-Korea match. What is your specific knowledge in regards to Dr Moustafa's involvement?

Christer Ahl (CA): Well, it really started with the Women’s Qualifications. I had been asked to nominate a referee couple, and the IHF had also nominated a supervisor. Just a few days before the event started, these nominations were abruptly cancelled. When I inquired, I was told by the then Managing IHF Director, Frank Birkefeld, that the President of the Asia Handball Federation (AHF) had reminded the IHF President of their agreement that no supervisor or referees would be sent. The referees were instead nominated and supervised by the Asian referee chief, Dawud Tawakoli. So it was frustrating when later on the Korean and Japanese teams started protesting.

For the Men’s Qualifying, we nominated one top couple to handle the critical matches. The IHF Managing Director sent a letter to the Asian Federation emphasizing that this couple, of course, should referee the KOR-KUW match. I assumed that everything was in order and was shocked to find out that this key match had been played on the first day but with some Jordanian referees. And, of course, I became seriously concerned when I started finding the reports and videos of the scandalous refereeing on the internet. Only a while later, did I learn that the IHF President had said that “he had been forced to withdraw the nomination because it had been announced too far in advance”. This is, of course, a totally silly explanation, as everyone in Asia took for granted that the visiting European referees would handle this critical match. And then, during my appearance as the only IHF witness in the CAS Tribunal, I found that the Asians had testified that the withdrawal in fact was caused by yet another reminder from the AHF President to the IHF President about what they had agreed, namely that the Asians should have free hands to manage the refereeing in this event. That they used this to hand-pick an ineligible and incompetent couple to handle the top match is another story.

JR: The Women’s tournament took place in August, the Men’s tournament in September, but it wasn’t until December 2008 that the IHF publicly acknowledged that there might have been some problems with the qualification tournaments. Arguably, this is the biggest crisis ever to afflict the IHF. Why did it take so long to respond?

CA: Yes, this was a concern for me also, as it involved refereeing and caused a number of people to contact me for explanations that I was not in a position to provide. Through the IHF Office I pressed for faster action, but I had the distinct sense that the Executive Committee did not want to touch the issue and preferred to dump it on the Council. Finally, in mid-November, I was asked to arrange for a review and analysis of the video. With the help of two PRC members I provided both a chronological analysis and rather blunt written conclusion.

JR: Your commentary, as depicted in the CAS report http://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.535, on the officiating of the Korea-Kuwait match is pretty stark and compelling as to the degree the officials fixed the match. I’ve seen portions of the match and it truly is disgraceful and a black eye for the sport. What was the reaction of Dr Moustafa and others when they saw the video?

CA: I do not know who saw the video at an earlier stage and how they might have reacted. But you may find it hard to believe that the Council never watched any part of the video. At the meeting I described the results of our analysis and also quoted extensively from my conclusions. My explanations must have been rather convincing, because, much to my amazement, it was declared unnecessary to watch any part of the video. I must say that, as the CAS Tribunal sharply criticized, the meeting process did not match the severity of the issue. For instance, the analysis and conclusions had not been provided in advance, the Asians were not fully forewarned, there was no legal guidance available, and the meeting was poorly run, to put it mildly. A highlight was when suddenly the AHF president phoned in to the IHF president, seemingly in order to influence our discussions….

JR: The IHF ordered replay tournaments, but the AHF didn’t sit idly by and they filed suit against the IHF. And it was eventually agreed to let the CAS rule on appropriateness of the Council’s decisions. You indicated earlier that you were the only IHF witness at the CAS Tribunal. The text of the CAS report also implies that the arbitrators were pretty frustrated that the principal players involved did not testify. Why were you the only one to testify?

CA: I was rather baffled already prior to the Tribunal when I found from the IHF Office that I was essentially the only one submitting background information for our lawyers, even if I was not the person in the best position to do so for all the aspects. And then I was amazed to find upon arrival in Lausanne that I was the only witness from the IHF. Especially the fact that Sasha Kozhukov was missing seemed strange. I never got an explanation. The IHF President was available, but the IHF lawyers indicated that they believed his testimony could be more damaging than helpful to the case of the IHF, so they advised him to stay out. What it meant was that I was the only one who could offer IHF’s argument regarding both the whole chain of events and especially the process at the Council meeting.

JR: Aside from the Asian Olympic Qualification tournament there are reports that Moustafa and Roca have intervened in the assignment of officials at the Olympics and other contests. Can you confirm this?

CA: This has been asserted in the media lately and it must be based on some misunderstanding. I need to split my answer into two parts. First, the PRC nominations of couples to a specific event have to be approved by the Executive Committee under our regulations. On some occasions, they have insisted on changes to these nominations, like prior to the Olympics last year. Ironically, the couple the Executive Committee inserted went on to perform in such a way that the PRC and the IHF President had to decide together immediately after the Olympics to eliminate this couple for all future competitions. The second part refers to nominations during an event. Regulations dictate that the Competition Management, which includes one or two Executive Members together with the PRC president and perhaps someone else, must approve the proposals for each match from the PRC. Normally this goes smoothly without much debate and with very few changes. But in Beijing it was terrible. The number of changes requested by Roca or Kozhukov (NOT the President) was unreasonably high and led to many chain reactions, where several other matches had to be changed also. All in all a very high proportion of the matches were affected. But for me the worst part was that the changes typically involved some specific teams, for which my colleagues constantly wanted ‘better referees’, even if it meant taking them away from difficult matches where the PRC felt that they were better needed. But on this specific point, the President has in fact been unfairly mentioned. His only involvement was a strong dispute with Kozhukov, not surprisingly over the refereeing in the match Russia-Egypt…

JR: Another scandal that is frequently mentioned is the pre-Olympic tournament in Athens where it's reported that half the Egyptian team sat out a match when they found out there would be drug testing. Can you confirm that this happened?

CA: I was present and it did indeed essentially happen like that. The Egyptian team got surprised and angry when they were told before the game that there would be testing. They tried to argue that this should not be allowed etc. And then it also took some time for them to sort out which players would be able to play. I think about half, 8 of 16, participated when the match was finally started.

JR: This calls to mind some of the doping issues that have been reported. As the PRC Chair, doping issues aren’t directly in your lane, but as an IHF Council member you probably have some insight into these allegations. Notably two members of the IHF Doping panel resigned in protest earlier this year. What is your sense for these issues?

CA: As you noted, this is not in my area, so I cannot offer many details. But it seemed clear that secrecy and independence that must be given to the Doping Unit did not seem respected. They must be allowed to keep their plans out of the scrutiny of the President and the Executive Committee, and their budget allocations must be handled in a way that does not jeopardize confidentiality.

JR: And, of course, accounting for expenses have also been an issue. It’s been reported that Dr. Moustafa has spent quite a bit on travel without having to produce receipts. My own experience has always been that I was required to keep travel receipts for a couple of years just in case I was audited. It seems reasonable to expect that someone that rings up $500,000 in travel costs would be required to do the same. Am I missing something here?

CA: It came up in late 2007 that the President apparently had arranged his travel outside IHF and then been reimbursed without submitting receipts, something very different from what the rest of us have to accept, namely that we do not get one cent reimbursed without receipts. As it was found that for some strange reasons the Treasurer and the Managing Director had been aware but without taking any action, the Council felt that retroactive measures would not be reasonable but that the President would have to undertake to change his practices immediately. The President apologized and accepted that decision. All this would be clear to anyone listening to the tape recording of the Council meeting. However, much to my amazement, the minutes of the meeting later on claimed falsely that just the opposite had been decided, namely that we had decided to let the improper habits continue. I thought it was an innocent mistake and tried to have the minutes corrected, but nothing happened. Later I tried to enlist Council colleagues to join me in demanding a correction, but to no avail. It is truly amazing that something like this can be allowed to happen.

JR: Any closing thoughts or other points that you would like to make?

CA: As I mentioned previously, nothing will really improve at the top unless the current President is removed. As regards the PRC, I’m strongly supporting my highly regarded colleague, Manfred Prause for the PRC Presidency. One of the other candidates, Dawud Tawakoli, for this position is clearly tainted by the Asian Olympic qualification matter and other refereeing controversies in Asia. He was responsible for the officiating assignments at the Asian Women’s tournament that resulted in the overwhelming favorites, Korea, losing out to Kazakhstan. He was also involved in bringing the ineligible Jordanian referees to the men’s event. Aside from this, he is widely considered to be too inexperienced and to lack the competence needed. The IHF referees have no respect for him. I sincerely hope that the voters are smart enough to dismiss him! There are other candidates as well, but I think that continuity in the management of the refereeing is extremely important at this time.

Christer Ahl, the current IHF chair for the Playing Rules and Referees (PRC) Commission, has decided to endorse Jean Kaiser of Luxembourg in the upcoming IHF election. Ahl, has been involved with the IHF/PRC for 32 years, serving as the PATHF representative from 1992 – 2004. Since 2004 he has been the PRC chair and a member of the IHF Council.

In the first of a two part interview, Ahl explains why he is supporting Jean Kaiser and describes the current fundamental problems with IHF management/leadership.

John Ryan (JR): I understand you now want to go on record in regards to the upcoming IHF election. Who are you supporting for President?

Christer Ahl (CA): There are so many things that urgently need to be changed: an unacceptable leadership style; a lack of democracy and open debate; a treatment of the Council as a ‘necessary evil’ rather than an important body in the ongoing decision-making; a lack of strategic planning and collective determination of goals and methods; a corresponding lack of participation and transparency in the budget process, with a real accountability at all levels. These are fundamental aspects of the work of any organization and it really means that I find the IHF to be ‘dysfunctional’ as it operates today. There are many other aspects requiring change, but I will stop there for the moment. I think the fundamental and important nature of these problems should make it obvious that they cannot be resolved without new leadership. In other words, I must support a change at the top, so Jean Kaiser gets my support.

JR: Why are you coming out now, instead of months ago?

CA: As long as I had some hope of being re-elected, I preferred to influence things from within. Our team in the PRC had also agreed that I would be the best leader for the next period. We have many recently started initiatives that we need to follow through on, so continuity is vital. This is also the case at a time when there has been so much concern with bribery in the area of refereeing. In other words, I did not want to negatively affect my chances by speaking out openly. In today’s climate in the IHF there is regrettably (and incorrectly) no tolerance for that.

JR: You say "influence from within". I guess I should say as full disclosure at this point that we're both Americans, we've known each other for quite awhile and I was pretty critical of you and others for not speaking out. I understand the rationale of trying to influence from within, but have always felt that it is a compromise that has allowed fundamental problems to fester. Were you ever conflicted with this compromise? Also, what would you say to those that might think that this sudden change of conscience is simply sour grapes from someone who is no longer part of the "inside crowd"?

CA: When you take on a higher position, you have the hope that you will be able to influence things so that the situation can go from ‘bad’ to ‘better’. I had a good sense of the major problem areas and I had known the President for a long time. But, instead of going from ‘bad to better’ it gradually went from ‘bad to worse’. The dwindling of the Executive Committee was one reason, but the fact that the Council was willing to put up with a lack of sufficient insight and the lack of an appropriate role in the decision-making made it impossible for things to improve. One does not get very far by being the ‘lone voice’; I was three times threatened with suspensions and the treatment of Peter Muehlematter was far worse. A ‘critical mass’ is needed to achieve change, but most people do not want to ‘rock the boat’ because in an autocracy this means running the risk of being out of favor and losing some benefits for your continent. So I am disappointed with both myself and my colleagues.

JR: Fair enough; and I have to admit that I'm not privy to the inner workings of IHF politics. As an outside observer, it sure doesn't look pretty. How did you (and others) see your roles and responsibilities on the Council?

CA: I suspect I take a more ambitious view, which might not be so logical given the heavy workload I have had as a Commission President, with lots of operational work and people management. I see the Council as the key group for developing strategies, goals and policies, leaving the 'execution' and ongoing follow-up to the Executive Committee. In reality, though there is not much strategic work undertaken by anyone, and then the agenda of the Council is often loaded up with administrative decisions and other rather mundane questions. Added to this is the fact that we do not meet very often in the first place. Then, apart from the Executive members and the five Commission Presidents, we have a rather one-dimensional group of nine continental representatives. They are already heavily involved in key positions in both their continents and sometimes also their countries, so they are typically more likely to have a parochial interest in thinking about the tangible benefits for their continents. It is more rare to see them think of themselves as part of the management of the IHF as an organization. This lack of planning and goal setting, in my opinion, results in problems with budget accountability and overall transparency in the decision-making.

JR: How so?

CA: Frankly, there is not much participation in the budget process and there is certainly no personal accountability on the part of Council members individually or collectively. The budget proposal for the next year emerges from the Treasurer and the Executive Committee, largely on the basis of the current year's trends and the previous year’s results. There is not much discussion about the underlying assumptions or about how the amounts tie into specific strategies or goals. Some items may be rather self-evident, recurring or small, but other items may be huge, seemingly amorphous or linked to clusters of projects lumped together. This makes it difficult to follow up and see how money is actually used. The result is that without a consensus-based goal setting and a clear budget accountability, there is far too much room for a President and an Executive Committee who are so inclined to ‘hi-jack’ the entire decision-making and spending processes.

JR: Do you see any obvious ways of achieving improvements in the overall management structure?

CA: Mostly it depends on moving towards democracy and participation in general terms. Then it is clear that the rights, the obligations, and the tasks of the Executive Committee and the Council must be defined differently. And then the Council needs an infusion from other stakeholders, especially the athletes, but also representatives of media, sponsors and those who pay to watch handball. Also, a much strengthened headquarters staffing with more technical experts and specialists, who can serve as the necessary support structure for the elected and appointed people, is necessary and long overdue.

JR: Are you still a candidate for PRC Chair?

CA: I am at the point where I intend to withdraw my own candidature, and support my close colleague, Manfred Prause. He has the experience and competence to provide the continuity and leadership that is needed. I am not stepping down because it was what I had planned. It is rather because it had become clear that political manipulations will leave me without any chance in the elections. While I regret that it is not quality and results that count, I have to accept the reality that politics and power games are part of high-level sports these days. I have enjoyed the many years that I have been able to work for the sport I love, so I will think back on many wonderful experiences and the fantastic people I have met.

In part two of the interview, Christer Ahl, provides his firsthand account of many of the alleged manipulations that have occurred with Dr Moustafa’s direct involvement.

In two letters addressed to all the national federations, Jean Kaiser has further outlined his intended changes for the IHF should he be elected President. As with previous letters and articles the case against Dr Moustafa is outlined in detail. Towards the end of the letter, however, Kaiser branches off with solutions and a way forward. Specifically the letter outlines 4 areas for change:

A) Administration: Proposes complete transparency in financial matters
B ) Cooperation with the Continental Federations
C) Communication: Proposes regional conferences and direct engagement with the athlete’s commision
D) Marketing of the product Handball: Proposes establishment of an IHF marketing division

1st Letter: http://teamhandballnews.com/request57.html
2nd Letter: http://teamhandballnews.com/request58.html

IHF Secretary General Peter Muehlematter is actively making his case for re-election. In a recent letter to all National Federations, he received the backing of Jackson Richardson, Erhard Wunderlich and Zlatko Portner. In the letter (see link below) the current/former handball plead for the voters not to be hoodwinked by the favors they may receive in Cairo during the IHF congress. The letter rehashes many of the allegations that have already been made, but also highlights a couple new ones concerning finances in support of the 1999 WC in Egypt and the outright fear and negative working conditions of staff members at the IHF Headquarters in Switzerland.

In addition to the letter campaign, SecGen Muehlematter has launched a blog site on the web. The blog site contains a 2 minute video of the candidate making his case and encourages any national federation member with questions to contact him directly.

Richardson/Wunderlich/Portner Endorsement: http://teamhandballnews.com/request60.html

Peter Muehlematter Blog: http://petermuehlematter.blogspot.com/