There is a lot of controversy surrounding Johan Bruyneel's visit to the Tour de France. The UCI believes that the Belgian should not have been granted access to accredited zones in any capacity, but Bruyneel disagrees. He is threatening legal action against UCI president David Lappartient, and, according to professor of sports and labor law Frank Hendrickx, he has a strong case.
Hendrickx, affiliated with KU Leuven, stated in an interview with Knack magazine that a UCI ban conflicts with fundamental rights. "A disciplinary sanction must not undermine internationally recognized basic rights, such as the right to work, which is also protected by the free movement of workers within the European Union," Hendrickx explained.
"The right to private life is also broadly interpreted and applies to everyone, also to Bruyneel as a private individual or media guest, as in this case." The professor emphasized that a penalty must always comply with the principle of proportionality: the sanction must be proportionate to the offense. "A lifetime ban on access to accredited zones is excessive. The suspension targets official roles within cycling, not public or media appearances."
The UCI released a statement last Tuesday, indicating that the ASO is responsible for issuing accreditations. Bruyneel received accreditation for the Tour village and the team bus area. According to the former rider, the ASO management even supported his presence at the Tour de France.
"ASO acted correctly by allowing Bruyneel," Hendrickx concluded. "An organizer cannot simply bar someone based on a UCI suspension, especially if that person is acting in a different capacity."
Is a lifetime ban also contestable?
According to Hendrickx, Bruyneel’s lifetime ban for violating doping regulations is also legally challengeable. "The scope of such a sanction — both in content and duration — must always be proportional to the offenses. A lifetime exclusion from all cycling-related activities does not legally hold up against fundamental rights."
