Meet the Expert: Katarina Pijetlovic

Katarina Pijetlovic is an Assistant Professor in sports law and competition law and currently serves as Head of Legal at the Palestine Football Association (PFA).

At the Palestine Football Association, Katarina’s role as Head of Legal has taken her directly into the heart of football governance. Katarina is also an established academic authority in EU sports law and competition law, as the author of EU Sports Law and Breakaway Leagues in Football (2015), and served as a former Advisory Board Member of the PTPA.

Your career spans academia, activism, and authorship, notably your book on breakaway leagues. What drew you to law and more specifically, sports law?

I was finishing my Master’s degree in Contract and Commercial Law at the University of Helsinki when I realized I didn’t want to spend my career in that field. It was a difficult and quite depressing realization. I had invested years into something that in the end didn’t feel right. I remember walking out of the Law School, wondering what I would do next, when I overheard a student mention she was writing her thesis in sports law. In that moment, I reacted like a cat hearing the fridge door open: suddenly alert, with eyes wide, and ears perked. Sports law?! Are you telling me there is something called sports law and nobody ever mentioned it to me during my five years of legal studies? This was back in 2003, so it was still a relatively new field, and not many people were writing about it yet. That moment completely changed my direction. I ended up pursuing both my lower and higher doctoral degrees in sports law.

There’s an ongoing (and sometimes never-ending) debate about whether sports law constitutes a distinct field, with some arguing that it does and others suggesting that it doesn’t. How do you define sports law?

I no longer concern myself with definitions, whether sports law is a distinct legal field or simply a collection of legal areas applied to the sports industry in a specific way. That debate feels mostly theoretical, and over time, I’ve grown less interested in purely academic discussions, especially those that take a decade to produce minimal change, like closing one legal loophole while many others remain.

That said, for someone unfamiliar with the field, I’d describe sports law as having two main components. First, it involves the specific application of general legal principles—such as contract, competition, and tort law—to issues arising within the sports industry.

Second, there’s lex sportiva, which refers to the body of rules, regulations, and decisions issued by sports governing bodies at both the national and international levels, including rulings by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. These two areas interact, and in theory, lex sportiva should align with national and international laws. However, in practice, I’m not aware of a single global or European sports governing body that complies with legal standards or principles of good governance. Accountability in this space is extremely limited, and legal mechanisms often fall short, which is particularly concerning when addressing serious human rights concerns.

⚽️ EU Sports Law and Breakaway Leagues in Football

You wrote the first book to properly unpack how breakaway football leagues (like the European Superleague) fit within EU law. For those who don’t come from a legal background, what was the big legal question you wanted to answer?

Before the European Superleague ruling and still today, UEFA’s Statutes contain clauses that restrict and condition the formation of alternative leagues, such as the Superleague. I wanted to explore the legality of those clauses and, more broadly, how far a governing body like UEFA can go in imposing conditions for setting up new cross-border competitions and leagues organised by another entity other than itself. In Europe, UEFA has always been the only player in the market for organizing cross-border football competitions, giving it a de facto commercial monopoly. My concern was that UEFA was using its regulatory powers to protect and maintain that monopoly.

At the same time, I wanted to explore a question that had been largely overlooked: which types of alternative or breakaway leagues are actually compatible with competition law? Not all breakaway or alternative leagues are the same.  Those made up of elite clubs can potentially cause real harm to European football at both continental and domestic levels, widening the financial gap and pushing smaller or mid-sized clubs into even deeper financial trouble. But there are also alternative league models that could be beneficial. For example, a cross-border league involving the Baltic countries could help address serious issues in those markets, particularly when it comes to selling broadcasting rights. Such a league could generate new income streams and bring more stability to domestic football in the region.

Football has witnessed elite clubs wanting more control and organisations like UEFA wanting to keep a tight grip. Is it possible for governing bodies to protect the ‘integrity of the game’ efficiently without abusing their power?

It's not merely that this is possible, but it is in fact required of them under EU law and policy, provided they carry out their roles in line with principles of good governance.

At the heart of this requirement is an obligation to ensure equal input in governance from all clubs, as well as meaningful involvement from key stakeholders, including fans and players, at all levels. Currently, elite clubs dominate decision-making, primarily through their positions on the board of the European Club Association (ECA) and its formal and informal influence over UEFA governance. These clubs generally have little interest in changing the status quo, and this includes many of those that dominate their domestic leagues in smaller and mid-sized football nations.

The EU’s recent trilogy of judgments (European Superleague, ISU, and Royal Antwerp) have made it clear that sports governing bodies do not have a free pass under (EU) competition law. Looking ahead, do you think these rulings will reshape the way sports governing bodies operate? And how might competition law change the way football is governed in the next decade?

There’s already a substantial body of writing on this topic, and I’ve contributed to some of it myself, so I won’t go into too much detail here. In short, competition law certainly has potential and has played a role in preventing some serious disasters, but I remain sceptical that it will ever fundamentally reshape how FIFA and UEFA operate.

I don’t foresee a future where we can confidently say they are fully compliant with EU competition law. For every door that competition law might close, ten new ones open as workarounds emerge and new issues arise. It can serve as a check on uncontrolled power, but due to financial constraints, slow process, and the politics involved in bringing a complaint against FIFA and UEFA, meaningful institutional reform of these governing bodies is, in my view, unlikely. That said, I’d be happy to be proven wrong.

🌍 Global sports governance and geopolitics

As Head of Legal at the Palestine Football Association (PFA), what does your role involve? What kinds of legal matters do you typically work on?

As Head of Legal, I primarily focused on issues that involve dealing with legal matters before FIFA. In May, we were at FIFA Congress in Paraguay where one of our proposed items was on the agenda. However, my informal role extends beyond this description. As a lawyer-activist, I also engage with a wide range of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders.

The PFA has spent over a decade raising concerns about Israeli settlement clubs playing on occupied territory in violation of FIFA rules. What legal basis underpins their argument?

The PFA have set out the detailed legal basis in every proposal to the FIFA Congress to place an item on the agenda for the past 13 years. In summary, there are two main points to be made.

First, it is about territorial integrity provisions in Art 64 of the FIFA Statutes that prohibit member associations and their clubs from playing on the territory of another member association without the latter’s approval. In exceptional circumstances, which are not defined anywhere, it would be possible to bypass this provision, but only if the Palestinian FA, UEFA, Asian Football Confederation, and FIFA all give approval. The Israel FA never received any of these approvals. If FIFA (and UEFA) were so confident in its legal position, they would have formally given approval to the Israel FA under Art 65 of FIFA Statutes.

Secondly, when FIFA accepts new associations into its membership, it does so on the basis that those associations are responsible for organising and supervising football in their country. A Country is defined in FIFA Statutes as “a state recognised as independent by a majority of members of the United Nations”. Palestine and Israel both fulfil this definition. But the UN doesn’t recognise countries in abstract, but within clearly defined territory – at least with Palestine and Israel we know that in all binding and non-binding UN resolutions, the West Bank (where the illegal settlement clubs are located), is occupied Palestinian territory. Nowhere does it say that it belongs to Israel, and in fact, the ICJ and both the General Assembly and Security Council of the UN pointed out that the illegal settlements constitute a grave breach of international law, and should be evacuated immediately. FIFA claims it is above international law, despite being told otherwise by all main human rights organisations and the UN human rights experts. If we follow FIFA’s position – that international law does not apply to it – its own Statutes and human rights policy still do apply. By allowing illegal settlement clubs to be a part of its structures, FIFA participates in the illegal occupation and colonisation of Palestine. Since this issue was brought up 15 years ago, these clubs have increased in number due to FIFA’s decision to ignore the issue, helping to normalise life in the settlements and to fortify the brutal apartheid regime. Palestinians are not even allowed to enter the matches organised on their own territory from which their families were expelled so that Israeli settlers can build football pitches and stadia. How is all this in line with Art 3 of FIFA Statutes that creates a statutory obligation on FIFA to respect and promote all internationally recognised human rights? The fight to return legal and political jurisdiction over its footballing territory continues for the Palestine FA, but every day it is harder as more and more of its territory is being illegally occupied and annexed.

When Russia invaded Ukraine, football (and sporting) governing bodies acted swiftly in response. In contrast, the response to Palestinian appeals has appeared slow and procedural. What do you think explains the difference in approach?

Politics. Most of the big sponsors of the Olympics, FIFA, and others, are Western corporations and if you have a look at their ownership structures, you will notice that institutional investors almost always include large asset management companies. Their investment portfolios list tech companies like Google (Alphabet), but also major US and Israeli weapons manufacturers. These companies also own significant shares in media companies that purchase FIFA broadcasting rights. The rabbit hole is deep and network is wide and multilayered.

When Russia integrated Crimean clubs into its leagues in 2014, UEFA promptly kicked them out on the basis of equivalent provisions. One of the people pushing for this was none other than Mr Infantino, the current president of FIFA who was UEFA’s Secretary General at the time. Mr Ceferin now lives in denial of his own culpability, but he has already firmly placed himself on the wrong side of history. His claim that it is not the fault of the players and clubs who shouldn’t suffer for the actions of their governments might work for other countries, but in Israel, players who are in European clubs and the Israeli national team have publicly called for the annihilation of Palestine and spread genocidal propaganda on their social media. They include IDF reservists, who served to help implement apartheid, occupation and ethnic cleansing. Israeli clubs publicly support the IDF both materially and morally. The Chairman of Israel FA and his staff have visited the Israeli Air Force, the same entity that has bombed Gaza, destroyed Palestinian football fields, and killed hundreds of footballers. Over 100 of those killed were children in football academies. Israeli fans have displayed banners that say one Israeli child is more valuable than one Palestinian child and sung racist slogans in Europe, without facing any consequences from the Israel FA or UEFA.

When we submitted our proposal to FIFA for Congress 2024, the Israel FA engaged the government and military to ensure, in their own words, that our proposal was torpedoed and never reached the Congress vote. The IDF throws gas bombs at the Palestine FA headquarters every week. Since October 2023 there has been no organised football in Palestine. Mr Ceferin and Mr Infantino, both of whom have been informed about all of the above, said nothing and did nothing. There was no financial support for Palestinian football. No programme for Palestinian players who evacuated abroad and stayed without income. No support for those that were injured and stayed without limbs, including children.

It is clearly not about law and regulations. It is about a powerful lobby pulling strings in small and big matters of international football. When Mr Infantino was elected President of FIFA in 2016, the Israel FA said that it was great news for Israeli football, as he was a friend and it would be very difficult to sanction them while he was in charge. Need I say more?

You’ve said this issue is not about legal complexity but political will. Can individual federations or clubs take independent action when global bodies fall short or does real accountability require reform from the top?

Unfortunately, accountability has fallen onto the shoulders of fans, players, clubs, and individual associations. It shouldn’t have, but it has. It is now on them, individually and collectively, to take meaningful action if they want to see change.

When governing bodies fail so profoundly at such a critical moment in history, what alternative is there? All that would be required to suspend Israel from international football is for a handful of UEFA member associations to publicly declare their refusal to compete against Israeli clubs and national teams, citing their complicity in genocide, apartheid, and the ongoing occupation that has devastated Palestinian football. This would undoubtedly cause more associations in Europe and the world to join this motion, which is really a call for justice and accountability when formal accountability mechanisms fail or are nonexistent. But most national associations are reluctant to raise their voices, unmotivated by any clear gains, simply want to fit in and avoid upsetting the establishment and status quo. There are exceptions, of course, and some associations have taken a more constructive stance, but so far, no concrete action has been taken. The pressures on these associations are immense. The same goes for players. If many players refused to play against Israeli clubs and teams and staged a sustained, widespread boycott, we would see FIFA and UEFA forced to take action. Big names in particular have the power to set an example, but we saw close to nothing from them. This is shameful and disappointing, given that we’re talking about people who have hundreds of millions in their bank accounts, meaning their livelihoods would not be endangered. Meanwhile, around 350 of their peers have been killed in Palestine, where football is on the verge of irreversible collapse and taking its last breaths.

🎾 The Professional Tennis Players Association Lawsuit

You were an Advisory Board Member at The Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA). What kind of issues did you advise on, and what was that experience like for you?

I was involved for the first year, until the CEO and management team were hired. After that, the Advisory Board became redundant and no longer held meetings. In the beginning, the main challenges were securing recognition from a broad range of stakeholders, gaining support from players, deciding on the country of incorporation, handling PR matters (for which a company was hired), and addressing other similar issues. We met weekly online, as this was during the Covid pandemic. Novak Djokovic attended a few of these meetings, and Vasek Pospisil was there every single time. Novak was the driving force behind the project. We were all meant to meet in NYC during the US Open in 2020 or 2021, I can’t recall, but the policy changed on meetings due to the pandemic, so we cancelled all the arrangements. It was a strange time and a strange experience when you were meeting people and working almost exclusively through a screen.

The PTPA has recently launched a lawsuit against the tennis governing bodies (ATP, WTA, ITF and ITIA), challenging their longstanding power dynamics in tennis. How significant is their lawsuit and could it set precedent for player-led challenges in other sports?

The PTPA initiated a major lawsuit in the UK, US, and the EU, which is significant because it challenges several rules that limit players' earnings. One of the key issues is the cartel-like arrangement and collective monopoly held by tennis governing bodies and the Grand Slam Board over the global tennis organizational market. Essentially, this market is controlled by the tours and tournaments run by these bodies, and their regulatory rules create a situation where no competing events or tours can emerge. For the top 30 ATP players, their services are essentially locked into these governing bodies, leaving them with no opportunity to play anywhere else, even if they wanted to.

This not only limits the potential for new competitions to arise but also restricts players from exploring other economic opportunities. And it's not just the top 30 players that are the focus of concern here. Lower-ranked players are also excluded from alternative tournaments simply because such tournaments don’t exist. To launch a successful event, you need the top 30 players involved, with opportunities for others to participate as well.

The lawsuit also addresses other contested issues, such as the fixing of prize money between tournaments, the exploitation of players’ names, images, and likenesses by tournament organizers, and the fact that players are restricted from freely entering into sponsorship deals with certain businesses while governing bodies and tournaments profit from those same businesses. Additionally, the PTPA raised concerns about the enforcement of anti-doping policies, which they described as "aggressive, unreasonable, and disproportionate”.

I agree with all of the legal claims made in this lawsuit and believe it will likely lead to changes in the rules of tennis and the broader sports industry. It could also set a blueprint for athlete-driven change on a global scale. One major error that the PTPA could make at this stage is to enter into a compromise deal with the tennis governing bodies. We’ve seen this happen time and time again when plaintiffs accept the lesser terms than they would get by the courts.

🎬 Final takeaway

What advice would you give to junior lawyers or young advocates who want to work in the sports industry?

Given the times we live in, I’ll borrow from Julian Assange, who said that his biggest disappointment was learning that even intelligent people can be cowards and that courage is a much rarer attribute than intelligence. So, I’d say, have some courage. Everyone can learn the rules and get to mingle with “the big boys”. It’s boring and unimpressive to anyone who has a shred of perspective. If you want to make a positive contribution, work in your own way to replace the current system, rather than being just another cog in the machine that maintains an unfair sport. Climbing the ladder within corrupt organizations that serve only the 1% isn’t a good measure of success or a good reflection of personal values. Aim to create something better.

You can access a copy of Katarina's book on EU Sports Law and Breakaway Leagues in Football here.

Sporting Legal

Interview conducted on 9 August 2025.