Macaluso defends need for appeal
Thursday, 02, August, 2007, 20:48
Luigi Macaluso, president of the Italian motorsport federation, has responded to Ron Dennis?s letter about the spy saga by reiterating his view that the FIA's International Court of Appeal is the right forum to settle the matter.
In a letter to Macaluso published on Wednesday, Dennis set out a detailed defence of McLaren?s actions and accused Ferrari of mud-slinging in the media.
Writing in response on Thursday, Macaluso stressed that he was not in a position to address Dennis?s points ? but said the difference between the two teams? versions of events underlined why it was necessary for their competing claims to be adjudicated by the appeal court.
?It is not my role nor would it be appropriate for me to answer your various points,? he wrote.
?It will be for the Court of Appeal to do so.?
Macaluso added that, regardless of McLaren?s version of events, it remained anomalous that the team should be found guilty as charged and yet serve no penalty.
?I would limit myself to stress that McLaren was found in breach of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code, but nevertheless escaped any penalty,? he wrote.
Macaluso said the potential ramifications of the case were such that it was vital that the FIA set the right precedent.
?As [FIA president Max] Mosley indicated in his letter of 31 July 2007, it is important for the world championship that the correct outcome is reached,? he wrote.
?It is clearly in the interest of the sport that the appropriate precedent for dealing with events such as these is set.?
Dennis argues that an appeal is unnecessary because Ferrari was given a full opportunity to present its case at last Thursday?s World Motor Sport Council hearing.
But Macaluso says Ferrari was merely an observer at the hearing and its lawyers were not able to cross-examine McLaren personnel and challenge their evidence.
?A hearing before the International Court of Appeal will allow Ferrari an opportunity to present its evidence and arguments in detail,? he wrote.