Malagò’s Path to FIGC Presidency: A Foregone Conclusion or a Legal Minefield?

In the high-stakes corridors of Italian football governance, victory is often measured not just by the votes secured, but by the legal loopholes survived. As the countdown begins for the FIGC (Italian Football Federation) presidential election on June 22, Giovanni Malagò appears to be the heavy favorite. On paper, the race is already over. In reality, a complex legal doctrine known as pantouflage threatens to derail the most powerful man in Italian sports before he can even take the oath.

For those following the sport from outside Italy, the FIGC is more than just a federation; This proves the nerve center of a national obsession. Controlling it means overseeing everything from the national team’s fortunes to the structural composition of Serie A. Malagò, the former head of CONI (the Italian National Olympic Committee), has spent years positioning himself for this role. He has the alliances, the political capital, and a significant lead in the polls. But as the old adage goes, the devil is in the details—specifically, in the details of Italian administrative law.

The Math of a Landslide

If the election were decided purely by political alignment, Malagò would likely be celebrating already. Current projections indicate that he has secured the backing of the most influential blocs in the game: Serie A, Serie B, the professional players’ union, and the coaches’ association. Together, these groups represent approximately 54% of the total voting power [1].

In a winner-take-all scenario, a 54% floor is a commanding lead. It suggests a broad consensus among the professional tiers of the game that Malagò is the right choice to modernize the federation and potentially push through structural changes—including a controversial proposal to reduce Serie A to 18 teams, a move designed to increase the quality and sustainability of the top flight.

Standing in his way is Giancarlo Abete, the current president of the Lega Nazionale Dilettanti (the National Amateur League) [4]. While Abete possesses deep institutional knowledge and a strong base among the amateur ranks, he is fighting an uphill battle against a candidate who has already consolidated the professional power centers. The race has evolved from a political contest into a legal drama.

The ‘Pantouflage’ Problem: Explained

To understand why Malagò’s victory is not yet official, one must understand pantouflage—the “revolving door” rule. In the United States, this is similar to “cooling-off periods” intended to prevent former government officials from immediately lobbying their former agencies or using insider influence for private gain.

In Italy, this is governed by Article 53 of Legislative Decree 165/2001. The law explicitly prohibits employees who exercised authoritative or negotiating powers on behalf of a public administration from working for private entities that were the recipients of those powers for a period of three years after leaving office [1].

Here is the rub: CONI, which Malagò led, is classified as a public administration. The FIGC, while a sports federation, is the entity that CONI oversees. The legal question is whether the FIGC presidency constitutes a “private professional activity” that falls under this restriction. Because Malagò left his post at CONI only one year ago, he is well within the three-year prohibited window.

For a global audience, it is helpful to view this as a conflict between sports autonomy and state regulation. While sports federations often claim they operate independently, the Italian state maintains a tight grip on the administrative legality of their leadership to prevent conflicts of interest.

Precedents and the ANAC Factor

Malagò’s legal team will likely argue that this is a formal technicality rather than a substantive barrier. They may point to the case of Petrucci, who moved from CONI to the Italian Basketball Federation (FederBasket) in January 2013. However, that precedent is fragile. At the time of Petrucci’s move, Legislative Decree 39/2013—which specifically expanded the scope of these laws to include presidential roles—had not yet entered into force [1].

The more pressing concern is the recent stance of ANAC (the National Anti-Corruption Authority). In a 2025 deliberation (n.436), ANAC reviewed the election of Luciano Buonfiglio. While that case involved a move in the opposite direction—from a federation to CONI—the authority reaffirmed a critical point: CONI exercises genuine administrative power over the federations, including the ability to appoint commissioners to take over failing boards [1].

By confirming that CONI holds “authoritative power” over the FIGC, ANAC has inadvertently strengthened the argument that Malagò’s move constitutes a violation of the pantouflage rules. If the FIGC is viewed as a subject under CONI’s administration, the three-year waiting period is not a suggestion—it is a requirement.

What In other words for Italian Football

The implications of a Malagò disqualification would be seismic. If the most favored candidate is ruled ineligible, the power vacuum would trigger a chaotic scramble for a new consensus candidate. Giancarlo Abete would suddenly find himself in a much stronger position, but the professional clubs (Serie A and B) might instead seek a “dark horse” candidate who shares Malagò’s vision for the league’s restructuring.

Beyond the personnel, the “18-team Serie A” project hangs in the balance. This proposal is a cornerstone of the modernizing agenda. A prolonged legal battle or a shift in leadership could delay these reforms for years, leaving the league in a state of strategic limbo while other European leagues continue to optimize their commercial models.

The Road to June 22

As it stands, the FIGC is waiting for a definitive ruling or a legal challenge to be resolved. Malagò has attempted to downplay the issue in recent days, treating it as a minor administrative hurdle. However, in the litigious environment of Italian sports politics, “minor” hurdles often turn into insurmountable walls.

The coming weeks will see an increase in lobbying and potentially a flurry of legal filings as opposing camps attempt to either cement Malagò’s eligibility or ensure his disqualification. For the clubs and players, the desire for stability is high, but the requirement for legality is absolute.

The next confirmed checkpoint is the election day on June 22. Whether the result is decided by the ballot box or by a judge’s gavel, the outcome will define the trajectory of Italian football for the next Olympic and World Cup cycle.

Do you think the ‘revolving door’ laws are necessary for sports governance, or are they an unnecessary bureaucratic obstacle? Let us know in the comments.