As FIFA scandal unfolds, ethical body found to be without ethics

     My choice for this week's ethics discussion is the latest charges involving FIFA (an international governing body of soccer), where officials have been accused of bribery, money laundering and bribery from an unnamed sportswear manufacturer who were vying for outfitting Brazil's soccer team. 

     The governing body is there to ensure that numerous football leagues/teams are able to compete against each other using standards and rules, enacted fairly across the board, and to ensure that those who participate have a set of "judges" who can impartially decide questions between teams.  Anyone in their position who has to deal with rules and rule enforcement (as a governing body, rules are their reason for living), has an ethical obligation to enforce those rules impartially, and to also follow FIFA's own rules as set forth in their charter, and international law.  As the story unfolds, this does not seem to be the case.

     Obviously, if the allegations are true, then using the "moral rules that we follow" morality definition from "The Moral of the Story" (Rosenstadt, 2013) seems to point to those who are guilty of bribery as having no moral compass.  They used their position to enrich themselves, instead of looking out for the sport's best interest.  Certainly this is much more black and white than many ethical questions, but I thought it best to start from the cut and dried and eventually move into something more difficult to parse.

"Nine FIFA Officials and Five Corporate Executives Indicted for Racketeering Conspiracy and Corruption". United States Department of Justice. May 27, 2015. Retrieved May 27, 2015