Former FIA deputy president, Robert Reid has issued a statement shedding further light on the reason for his shock resignation from the role.
His resignation came earlier this month as MotorsportUK chairman, David Richards, a previous supporter of Mohammed ben Sulayem, claimed the sport’s governing body had lost its moral compass.
In his resignation statement, Reid was equally harsh.
“When I took on this role, it was to serve the FIA’s members, not to serve power,” he said. “Over time, I have witnessed a steady erosion of the principles we promised to uphold. Decisions are being made behind closed doors, bypassing the very structures and people the FIA exists to present.
“Motorsport deserves leadership that is accountable, transparent and member-driven,” he added. “I can no longer, in good faith, remain part of a system that does not reflect those values.”
Now, the Scot has taken to Substack to issue a further statement.
Thanking those within motorsport and FIA member clubs who have given their support, he writes: “It is interesting, but not wholly surprising, that many of those messages of support came with the caveat of not being willing to say anything publicly for fear of retaliation, which highlights some of the issues we face.
“I would never ask anyone to put themselves in what they feel is an uncomfortable position, be it through a letter of support or a social post showing clear endorsement,” he adds, “as I don’t feel that it would be fair to do so.
“From other quarters the silence has been deafening,” he reveals.
“As I said in my initial statement, my decision to resign was not about personalities or politics. It was about principles. I took on this role with a clear mandate: to help lead a transparent, accountable, and member-led federation.”
Referring to what he had previously described as “the final breach of trust and due process”, the decision to take the promotion of the World Rallycross Championship in-house, even though the move could, according to Reid, “could carry legal risk under European Union competition law”, he writes: “One of the clearest and most troubling examples of this breakdown involved the internalisation of the World Rallycross Championship. I repeatedly raised concerns, both about the governance process and potential legal implications, and received no response, despite my elected responsibilities and fiduciary obligations.
“Eventually, I had no choice but to seek external legal advice and support. Only then did I receive a response, but unfortunately it lacked the clarity and rigour I had hoped for. I was told, in broad terms, that the governance process was sound and there was no legal risk.
“But no evidence or explanation was offered to support those assurances. As someone accountable to the membership and exposed to personal liability, that was simply not acceptable.”
In terms of the straw that effectively broke Richards’ back, his exclusion (and Reid’s) from a World Motor S[port Council meeting after they refused to sign NDAs (non-disclosure agreements), Reid adds: “One journalist said to me that perhaps the FIA should be more concerned with why people are leaking than who is doing it and I think that’s worth reflecting on.
“I did not refuse to sign the NDA amendment,” he insists. “I simply requested a short extension in order to seek legal advice on a complex document governed by Swiss law, which was presented with a relatively short deadline. That request was denied.
“As a result, I was excluded from the World Motor Sport Council meeting, in my view, both unfairly and unlawfully. Ten days later, my FIA email was disabled without notice. Multiple requests for assistance and explanation went unanswered until, following a legal letter from my counsel, I was informed this had been a deliberate decision.
“I spoke up when I felt fundamental principles were being eroded. I did so respectfully, constructively, and always with the aim of safeguarding the integrity of our sport. But doing so came at a cost.
“It became clear that raising legitimate concerns was not always welcomed and I experienced first-hand how challenging the status quo can lead to exclusion rather than dialogue. I don’t regret speaking up. But I do believe I was treated unfairly for doing so.”
Source: Pitpass / Digpu NewsTex