Op Ed: Transparency and Integrity: Foundations for the Legitimacy of European Sport – By António José Silva, Member of the SIGA Council

In the European sporting landscape, transparency and integrity have become inseparable conditions for institutional legitimacy. Transparency refers to the visibility of governance decisions, while integrity concerns their ethical quality and fairness. One without the other is insufficient: transparency without integrity becomes superficial self-promotion, and integrity without transparency becomes unverifiable rhetoric. Only when both coexist can sport fulfil its democratic and educational role in society.

For decades, European sport operated under the assumption that its social value was self-evident and beyond scrutiny. This belief—often referred to as the “myth of purity”—allowed opaque decision-making, conflicts of interest, and unequal access to power to remain largely unnoticed.

However, public expectations have changed. Today, sport receives substantial public funding, depends on taxpayers’ trust, and exerts cultural influence far beyond competitions. In this context, ethical legitimacy can no longer be presumed; it must be demonstrated.

The contemporary challenges faced by sport illustrate the cost of neglecting integrity: match manipulation, vote trading, financial opacity, patronage in governance, and interference in electoral processes are not isolated incidents—they are structural consequences of weak oversight and discretionary power.

Integrity erodes not only when rules are broken, but also when institutions are designed in ways that make accountability optional. When that happens, trust collapses faster than it can be rebuilt.

This is why transparency must be operational, not merely symbolic. Ethical principles are not credible unless they are measurable. Integrity does not emerge spontaneously from “values,” but from systems that prevent abuse and reward ethical conduct. European sport needs mechanisms capable of transforming normative ideals into verifiable practices: open financial reporting, predictable governance rules, inclusive participation, and evidence-based accountability.

Likewise, integrity depends on independence. A code of conduct has little value if its enforcement is controlled by those who may benefit from selective application. A federation cannot be considered trustworthy if stakeholders lack access to the information required to evaluate its actions. Transparency protects integrity precisely because it limits arbitrary power and subjects decision-making to public visibility. It is therefore not merely administrative; it is a safeguard of fairness.

A growing movement in Europe, led by SIGA, advocates not only for ethical commitment, but also for the development of indicators that quantify it. By translating transparency and integrity into objective criteria—visible governance structures, consistent financial disclosure, democratic oversight, inclusion, and accountability of institutional and commercial partners—sports organisations can be compared, assessed, and improved over time. Measurement shifts the debate from intention to evidence, from political discourse to institutional practice.

The next step in European sport governance is therefore cultural: accepting that integrity is not a moral accessory, but an operational condition of legitimacy. Sport cannot claim to educate, include, or inspire if it tolerates opaque management or privileges that escape scrutiny. Restoring credibility requires a governance culture that views transparency not as an obligation, but as a democratic commitment, and integrity not as a slogan, but as a structural safeguard.

Only when transparency and integrity function together—visibly, verifiably, and consistently—will European sport be able to fully regain the trust it seeks to represent.

Read the Original Article in Portuguese