FIA criticised for “absurd” rule barring drivers from speaking out

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: FIA’s political crackdown veers close to restricting human rights, an organisation representing athletes claims.

In brief

Athletes body calls out FIA for restricting competitor freedoms

Global Athlete, an international movement led by sportspeople, has called the FIA’s new restriction on motorsport competitors making political statements “absurd” and said the governing body “must not” limit drivers’ human rights.

“Without athletes, the sport does not exist. It is blatantly hypocritical to tell athletes to stick to their sports and stay out of politics while the FIA consistently leverage politics to their advantage,” said Rob Koehler, Global Athlete’s director general, said in a statement to RaceFans.

“Freedom of expression is a basic fundamental human right and sport rules cannot supersede human rights. Many people look up to athletes as agents of change. The example set by the FIA is that every child, youth and adult watching the sport should remain silent on social justice issues. It is simply wrong. Shame on the FIA. Athletes are humans first, athletes second.

“Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference’. Sport rules must not have the ability to limit that right. What’s next, will they take away drivers’ rights to vote? It’s totally absurd.”

Football’s global governing FIFA and the Olympic committees have previously made moves to restrict political activity by competitors during events. Koehler said he hopes “drivers do the same” as Olympic athletes who made stances that led to the loosening of such rules.

Schumacher and Vettel reunite for RoC

Mick Schumacher has been announced as the latest entry for the 2023 Race of Champions, meaning he will form Team Germany alongside Sebastian Vettel once again for the event’s Nations’ Cup.

The pair first teamed up in 2019, after Vettel had previously partnered with Mick’s father Michael for six successive Nations’ Cup wins from 2007-’12, then did so again when the event returned in February of this year on the snow and ice of Sweden.

Vettel was ROC runner-up, then the pair were knocked out in the quarter-final stage of the Nations’ Cup. Their opposition next year, in Sweden once more, includes Finland’s Valtteri Bottas Valtteri Bottas and Mika Hakkinen, Le Mans legend Tom Kristensen and Formula 2 champion Felipe Drugovich.

Carlin praises impact of F1 Academy already

F1 Academy, the new Formula 4 series exclusively for women that launches next year, is already having an impact according to Carlin’s deputy team principal Stephanie Carlin.

“F1 Academy has already done more for women in motorsport in the last month, than has been the case for the last ten years,” she said.

“For the first time, the top teams in junior motorsport are speaking exclusively with women drivers about races, test programmes and driver development.

“These are the converations that happen with leading junior rivers every season. However, due to the underrepresentation of women in the sport, these are almost always conversations exclusively with men. As preparations for F1 Academy now start to gather pace, there has already been so much progress and positive momentum.”

IndyCar to disappear from iRacing

No more IndyCar for iRacing players
The existence of the as-yet-unmade IndyCar video game from Motorsport Games and the exclusivity contract it has signed with the series has led to the iRacing simulator software platform losing its licence to use IndyCar content.

Every iteration of IndyCar’s evolving Dallara chassis has been made available on the software and 12 of the 16 circuits that featured on the 2022 calendar can be raced on. The current-spec car will still be usable within iRacing, but with all IndyCar-branded content removed and no Esports races using Indy cars or Indy Lights cars are allowed to be broadcast online.

IndyCar previously held the IndyCar iRacing Challenge was an IndyCar-sanctioned Esports series in 2020 and 2021, and iRacing also hosts the official virtual Indianapolis 500 and IndyCar’s official Esports series.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Some see the incentive for the FIA to crack down on motorsport competitors making political statements is to draw attention away from its partners in the various countries it works and races in:

Those partners are more often than not members of the FIA, right down to the F1 stewards room where the rules mandate that the host nation’s motorsport club appoints one of the stewards.

The FIA wants to be a global player representing motoring and motorsport clubs from around the world. This is what gives it leverage in its discussions with, for example, the United Nations, the European Union and manufacturers of cars. This also means it has members from across the world, and it has to be sensitive to local customs and political power. It’ll be much harder for the FIA to promote its core business if it is seen as promoting a particular political ideology.
MichaelN

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Arun Srini, Fastmovingthoughts, Stig 3 and Dom!

On this day in motorsport

  • 60 years ago today Trevor Taylor won the non-championship Natal Grand Prix at the Westmead circuit in South Africa, six seconds ahead of Jim Clark

Author information

Ida Wood
Often found in junior single-seater paddocks around Europe doing journalism and television commentary, or dabbling in teaching photography back in the UK. Currently based...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

64 comments on “FIA criticised for “absurd” rule barring drivers from speaking out”

  1. The true colours of the FIA come out. Let’s be frank, they never wanted to acknowledge Black Lives Matter or do their we race as one initiative. Now that public opinion has cooled they’re putting in steps to ensure they never have to again.

    Human rights? Stopping Racism? Addressing climate change? Bah, they’ll do the bare minimum. It’s entertainment, plain and simple. For sure there are some working within the system to use the massive resources for some good, but good is not the goal. Keeping us glued to our seats, stadiums packed, and eyes on the advertisements is…

    1. Human rights? Stopping Racism? Addressing climate change? Bah, they’ll do the bare minimum.

      They don’t actually have any obligation to do anything at all, unless they impose it on themselves.

      1. +1

        Change starts within!

      2. None of us have any obligation unless we impose it on ourselves. We’re all perfectly at liberty to suit only ourselves and ignore any pain and suffering around us.

        1. Yep, we are free to ignore it – we can also choose to deal with it at a more appropriate moment, setting some time aside specifically for that purpose.

          1. Ah the old “too soon/ now is not the time” gambit beloved by gun manufacturers and their enablers, and perpetuators of racism and bigotry. This is simply not how societal change has been made at any point in human history. At best it’s a childlike fantasy, at worst it’s an active form of silencing and misdirection.

          2. The way to solve the gun problem is to not allow people to have them. They aren’t necessary or even desirable, in a communal/holistic sense.
            And likewise, it isn’t solved while people are shooting – it’s solved before and afterwards, in meaningful discussion and with action. Not with slogans and opportunistic hijacking of completely unrelated media-driven events (like sports, for example).

    2. I agree @skipgamer. Money first, second and third.

    3. Yeah, and I hope it stays that way. Formula 1 is, entertainment. Not an NGO, or a political action committee. Besides, F1’s actual initiatives, the ones actually making a difference remain. The only thing that goes away are the self-serving vanity campaigns. Including, the supposed campaigns that were more branding exercises by drivers who drape themselves in whatever cause is currently trendy.

      I’m very glad we’re getting some order here, because the last thing we need in F1 is more politics and that’s what all those protests brought. Because unfortunately, even at the activist level, most movements are tainted by politics. BLM is the best example. So while there are people who love that FIA invest resources in minority communities, or Lewis Hamilton endowment at universities to help black kids get into STEM, many don’t like seeing BLM logos around; and that’s just fine. Same applies to many of the environmental groups

      1. @ajpennypacker Formula 1 is a sport, and sport is inherently political.

        1. Sport itself is inherently apolitical – it only becomes political when people impose their politics on it.

          1. F1 allowed politics all the time. You have royal families and government officials taking active roles and handing out trophies. National anthems are sung and the drivers forced to stand through them.

            I wonder if poppies will be banned, given they are much more political than “save the bees”, or if they’ll still have local militaries putting on displays.

            If they completely sterilise the events of all political content, I can accept it. If not, it’s pure hypocrisy to ban the drivers from showing sorry for being a decent and compassionate human being… Oh, sorry, “being political”

          2. You have royal families and government officials taking active roles and handing out trophies. National anthems are sung and the drivers forced to stand through them.

            I don’t consider those to be political in this context, or even a particularly negative aspect, personally.

            I wonder if poppies will be banned, given they are much more political than “save the bees”, or if they’ll still have local militaries putting on displays.

            Depends on personal viewpoint, doesn’t it. Poppies are just flowers – but many people apply an additional meaning to them that changes how they perceive them. Military displays aren’t particularly political at F1 events either – they are ceremonial, used to make the event more spectacular.
            If you go looking for politics, of course you’ll find it everywhere because you put it there. It’s in the viewer’s mind.

            If they completely sterilise the events of all political content, I can accept it. If not, it’s pure hypocrisy to ban the drivers from showing sorry for being a decent and compassionate human being… Oh, sorry, “being political”

            It’s not hypocrisy to separate a political movement from a sporting event.
            The sporting event becomes politically charged when someone comes along and utilises the sporting media reach for other (political) messaging and injects political pressure into it to impose one’s opinion, viewpoint or values on another.

            Perhaps if drivers were free to impose such messages at the F1 events, then they would happily allow their receivers to return the favour? That would be fair, just and respectful wouldn’t it?
            Freedom of speech works both ways, after all.

            Again – every F1 driver is free to do and say whatever they like outside of F1, just like you, me and everyone else.
            And also like everyone else, their choices come with consequences too.

          3. Poppies are just flowers – but many people apply an additional meaning to them that changes how they perceive them.

            A rainbow is just an effect caused by light refracting through raindrops. A fist is just a part of the human body arranged in a particular way. I wonder if the FIA will accept this….

            If you go looking for politics, of course you’ll find it everywhere because you put it there. It’s in the viewer’s mind.

            Encouraging an end to discrimination isn’t political to me, either. Nor is saving the bees. They are just encouraging decency. Yet these are exactly the things which are being targeted by the FIA.

            If a controversial political figure is at an F1 event handing out trophies and taking the spotlight, it gives them a large amount of kudos and publicity, which is giving them tacit support. Similarly, if the military of a country with controversial military policies is allowed to display, it is giving tacit approval to that military. And if the drivers stand there “respectfully” while the national anthem of a controversial regime is played, they are showing tacit support to that regime. To force them to do so is political in itself.

    4. Philip J Woodhall
      23rd December 2022, 16:21

      F1 drivers not allowed to speak , doesn’t surprise me they now have a middle east head and we all know that probably where he comes from people aren’t able to have free speech and there certainly won’t be any women racers cos they have to wear a hijab? , wouldn’t be able to see where they’re going ,no sorry making the gentleman in charge who is from the east very bad move.

      1. There are quite a few women racing in the Middle East, and until this point there was more free speech there than is now permitted to drivers.

      2. The FIA just started a female-only racing series…..

  2. With every new add (and there are lots) the style sheet changes… Extremely off putting @Racefans.net

    1. I used to find that. Then I realised that it cost next to nothing to go ad-free and I’ve never looked back (although it is really jarring when I come here and have to sign in again to remove the ads).

    2. Support the site and subscribe.

  3. The FIA is criticised for pretty much everything they do. That’s not news.
    How many ‘Global Athlete’ members are in F1?

    And again with the ‘right to freedom of expression?’
    No different to any other employee or contractor associated with any company in the world – while they represent the company, they have a set of rules and standards to abide by.
    Privately, in their own time – they can say and do as much or as little as they like, just like everyone else.
    No rights or freedoms have been taken way.

    1. +100 S

      “It is blatantly hypocritical to tell athletes to stick to their sports and stay out of politics…..”

      Nobody tells anything to the athletes (!), they tell it to the employees. The supposed athletes can still do whatever they please, whenever they please, but not on the job where they represent their employer. Just like anybody else in the world.

    2. The FIA do not employ the drivers, they are not FIA employees and they do not represent the FIA. Also most employees are not paid more than any other person in the company that employs them where as drivers often are, so you’re oversimplification and equating them to regular employees is a really bad example.

      Why is this change even needed as I’ve yet to see any justification for what driver conduct happened in recent history that meant this rule needed to be implemented. It’s pretty clear they took a look at the reaction to the Qatar world cup and decided they needed to protect some of their more unsavory hosts from negative criticism in future.

      What causes most criticism of the FIA is usually any changes they announce will hamper some parties so it’s fair their supporters will criticise the decision.

      1. The FIA do not employ the drivers, they are not FIA employees and they do not represent the FIA.

        Not directly….. But….
        The FIA own and run F1. F1 contracts teams to participate in their series. Teams subcontract and/or employ drivers.
        That’s no different from typical business contract structure – even the lowest subcontractor still ultimately represents the interests of the owner, no matter how many middlemen there are.
        In terms of these rules, the drivers are subject to the ISC on two levels – both directly as a condition of their racing licence and right to compete in FIA-sanctioned series, and also by extension of their team’s entry into the FIA’s series.
        The drivers are subject to all FIA conditions while they have any of the FIA’s branding showing, or are representing the FIA’s interests in any other way (including competition and ceremonial duties).

        Why is this change even needed

        Because the FIA say so. It’s their property and product, after all….

        What causes most criticism of the FIA is usually any changes they announce will hamper some parties so it’s fair their supporters will criticise the decision.

        I agree it’s fair – it would be unreasonable to think that they could make any change to anything without upsetting somebody
        In every situation, there will always be someone who doesn’t want or agree with change.

        1. And yet while the FIA may “own” F1 they do not have sole control as Liberty hold all the commercial rights for the sport and have some say in the way it is run. So no it is not strictly just their property and product as they’d find out if the teams broke away to their own series as you’ll see just how much of F1 is the teams and circuits and not F1. The FIA are not beyond reproach for decisions they make around the sport which is why their decisions can be challenged in a court.

          1. The teams won’t be going anywhere. They make more money in F1 than they’d ever make outside of it.

            And just for clarity – this isn’t an ‘F1’ issue, it’s an FIA ISC issue, which means that all FIA-licensed competitors are bound to it.
            Right from F1 all the way down to karting.

    3. The drivers are not employees of the FIA, but of their team. Most of the teams are happy for their drivers to make “political” statements and stand up for causes which are close to their hearts, as long as it doesn’t bring their company into disrepute, just as most companies are happy for their employees to do charity fundraisers etc.

      1. The teams may well approve of such an action – but if the FIA does not, then it’s a no-no.

        I expect the FIA would have no issue whatsoever with a driver making a political protest in the privacy of their team factory – but it’s a different matter altogether when they do it on the podium of an FIA-sanctioned public event.

        Reminder – if the FIA gives prior approval, there is no issue. It’s quite respectful to ask first, isn’t it?

    4. S, unfortunately the rule as written also impacts actions done outside the paddock, unless they’re kept a complete secret. If the FIA wanted to make it so it only applied on the job, it needed to be far more careful about how it wrote it.

      1. S, unfortunately the rule as written also impacts actions done outside the paddock, unless they’re kept a complete secret.

        Only if they represent (or misrepresent) F1 or any FIA property.

        Under their own name, not using any F1 imagery, branding or otherwise – the drivers are free to speak their mind about anything they wish.
        Outside of official duties, of course.

  4. I don’t watch racing for politics. I watch it for racing. And the last people I wanna hear politics from are athletes/celebrities/ultra rich people.

    Being a hypocrite used to put a blemish on someone.

    1. It seems to me that you are just ignoring the politics when you watch racing. It is there even if you choose to ignore it. Is it better to be willfully ignorant or a hypocrite?

      1. Oh shut up! If you want politics, watch politics you leftist goof.

        1. Big news the world does not have to follow your opinion.
          If a person watching formula 1 wonders why this driver wears this t shirt or takes the knee or speaks about a social matter then thatvis called education and thatvis the basis of our civilisation.
          Also, you are made to believe, these are political matters, they are connected but if you condemn killings in a country, bad environmental practices, all you are doing is saying this is a fact and be a aware of it, it does not dictates what to do, is only information.
          You don’t criticise all the ads on the cars, do you?
          Because all that they are doing is again giving information, the name of a brand that promotes and raises awareness to potential customers.
          So if you follow your own logic, bye bye sponsors and no more sports.

      2. I wonder if you’d say the same thing if it was a driver with right wing values and politics.

    2. You watch racing (or any sport), you watch politics. The former depends on the latter.

  5. I would be happy to F1 to stop completely if this will happen

    1. If I would be driving now I would say I can get my money from somewhere else. So drivers can do whatever they like and dreamed but as in dreams your voice doesn’t matter.

    2. What did people expect would happen when an Emirati became FIA President? The Arab nations are not big on freedom of expression or allowing criticism! This was seen most recently at the world cup & now some Arab nations are saying Western Countries must not criticise them or they will stop sending them oil!

  6. I think if someone in the future says a bad thing they are propably only going to get a fine and a finger wagging

    1. Quite likely – but let’s hope that they at least try to show sufficient respect for the rules, even if they don’t agree with them.

      1. S, that would require the FIA to stop ignoring the political neutrality rule. Which it won’t, and due to the complex nature of international motorsport, can’t.

        1. I’d really enjoy it if you could actually try to convince me that this makes the FIA more political and not less.

  7. So sad seeing how Indycar fell for the enormous red-herring that is ‘Motorsport Games’. What will happen won’t be an exclusive title at all, as with BTCC they will shoe-horn the existing content into Rfactor 2 where it will be sit for people who like one particular platform instead of being available on multiple different places. iRacing did a great job with Indycar over the years, MSG have done nothing but fleece various race series into exclusive license deals which they will sell on when they wind themselves up and cease trading at some point in 2023…

  8. Typical F1 fan:

    “Booo, current F1 drivers are corporate robots without personality, they all just parrot the company line, we want to see the real person!”

    (the F1 drivers start publicly taking stances on issues they care about)

    “Booo, current F1 drivers are too political, we don’t want them shoving their views down our throats, we just want to be entertained!”

    Sigh…

    1. Exactly this. It’s so stupid. They criticize drivers for being boring or having no personality, then when the drivers speak up and voice their opinions, be it through fashion or words, then suddenly these “fans” have a problem. It’s ridiculous.

    2. This is a strawman argument. I don’t think many fans hold both those opinions.

      1. I’ve seen several people state both opinions in the space of the same social media post.

    3. People who might find drivers somewhat bland aren’t necessarily the same people who object to drivers voicing political opinions. The internet is big enough that you can find people with whatever opinion on anything, and since most ‘social’ online platforms are heavily biased towards promoting ‘engagement’ (i.e. getting people wound up) it’s no wonder the negative stuff gets more play.

  9. I will comment on the new rule when I have received a fax from the FIA permitting me to do so.

    1. I heard if you want to speak out loud it will cost you £10 per letter and there is a discount offer as well but I haven’t got my hands in that yet ;)

  10. The FIA’s only remit is setting the rules of competition. They have no businesses interfering with the right to free speech.

    If you don’t like free speech, you don’t have to listen. That’s the beauty of freedom!

  11. Looking forward to seeing Vettel and Schumacher in the RoC next month as I do every year. Even if it is a repeat of the same event we had last year – that’s a bit of a shame I think personally, I really liked the indoor one they had in London a few years back.

  12. This will backfire. A few drivers are rich enough to break these so-called rules. We might even see a joint stand – what happens when several drivers wear a particular armband, or refuse to compete? In either case, the blowback would be far worse for the FIA (which is trying not to ruffle feathers in the middle east and China).

  13. Why is this even a discussion? Most of us thats employed have signed or know that we should not bring the companies we work for into disrepute. How ever there is no company rule that should supersede human rights. That restricts a persons right to exercise their rights or freedom of expression. This is a clear step backwards in what many have fought for. Sacrificed for. Even died amd continue to die for. “for the love of money is the root to all evil… ” soo true in these circumstances that people are willing to use their power to oppress others all for the sake of making more money.

    1. Does your employer prevent you from speaking your mind privately, Wayne?
      No? Neither does the FIA.

      Of course, you know that if they find out you’ve been publicly misrepresenting them or actively making them look bad to their customers and business partners, they won’t be happy about it. Right? Especially if you’ve signed a contract to say you support their policies.
      If you really want to spread those messages, your best bet is to leave the organisation first.

      1. How is promoting freedom of speech or human rights misrepresenting the company you work for? And how is that also making theor customers look bad? And you are mistaken. the counties that hold races are not the customers. The fans that buy the tickets and watch the races are. Hence ours and drivers right to express themselves. If the real customers are offended then they will not buy the tickets or watch the races. Same for soccer or any other sport. Sont confuse hosts with customers. Those are 2 very different things.

        1. And you are mistaken. the counties that hold races are not the customers.

          Nope, you are mistaken.
          The FIA, via their racing series (F1, in this particular discussion, but also including all the FIA’s other owned and affiliated racing series) sell spots on their racing calendars. ‘Host’ countries buy them.
          People who buy tickets to the events are customers of the host. It’s a multi-tiered system, where the promoter is the middleman who both buys and sells. Officially endorsed F1 media outlets are also F1’s customers, who also on-sell their product.

          How is promoting freedom of speech or human rights misrepresenting the company you work for?

          This company (FIA) is asking their contractors and representatives not to involve themselves in any unapproved political representation of F1 and the FIA. The drivers very much represent F1 – and by extension, the FIA.
          The ISC expressly forbids doing so, and the competitors have all willingly agreed to abide by said code.

      2. And to add… Thats why unions or employees will from Time to time strike for the rights of not only workers but also people in general. Your space of employment is not a bubble. It is alao affected by the politics of the day. By the world events that happen. By the weather etc. So we cant separate our work completely from our lives its apart of our lives.

        1. Unions are the ticket to unemployment for many workers – especially if they start striking. Striking usually does not benefit anyone but themselves in the short term, and nobody at all in the long term.

          Look, if you tune in to the F1 broadcast especially to be bombarded with completely unrelated messages about how terrible ‘other’ governments and corporations around the world are and how they should all change to be the way you want them to be, then more power to you.
          Not everyone wants this in their leisure time. It’s respectful to leave it out of sport, for everyone involved. A bit of acceptance (temporarily, at least) goes a very long way.

          Look at what a contentious subject it is – is that division what you want motorsports to be about?
          I’m betting not – and neither do the FIA and all of their international members.

          1. You are right i stand corrected. Host countries are customers. But we the fans are the ultimate customers. Those countries will come and go in terms of racing locations. But us fans are the true customers. And u right also we should not be bombarded with expressions of difference of opinion. Or with what ever is wrong in this world… Its the very reason why we dont have proper representation in f1 or many a sport. Because we ahould leave it out and by extention the minorities, and ppl that are different to what is considered normal…. We should wear our blinkers. Stick our heads in the sand. Because sport is not bias. Its not run by bias people. So why should sport highlight the biaseness of the world it is played in? Sport is sport. There’s no politics in sport. Ya right…

          2. Its the very reason why we dont have proper representation in f1 or many a sport.

            ‘Representation’ in elite sport is completely accurate. It’s the representation of the people who have the golden combination of sufficient interest in it, are good enough at it and have the required (financial) support to participate in it.
            If that just happens to be almost all white males in F1 (just as it’s mostly black males in basketball) then that’s just the way it is. You want representation – it provides itself.

            So why should sport highlight the biaseness of the world it is played in?

            Why indeed, when it can’t even hope to do anything about it?

            Sport is sport, and the only politics that need be in it is its own internal business politics.
            Going externally political does not unite people – it only ever divides. That’s the whole point of politics.

  14. I agree and disagree at the same time. you are correct but you are also wrong. Basket ball does not require vast amounts of financial backing. Or investment to play where as racing does. Many a driver what ever colour has been left out due to lack of finances. More so people of minorities because in the past these sports were not really wirhin reach. But anyway lets leave it there. I agree and disagree with you S.

Comments are closed.