What's next after Briatore's press conference bombshell
Alpine executive advisor Flavio Briatore stirred up one of the most explosive Formula 1 press conferences of recent times on Friday amid the fall out of the FIA International Court of Appeal verdict that took away his team's Monaco Grand Prix podium.
Just a few hours after the FIA published the verdict that McLaren and Red Bull's had been successful in their appeal against Pierre Gasly having his Monte Carlo top-three finish reinstated, Briatore went on the offensive.
But rather than criticise the conclusions the judges had come to, he took aim at one of them in particular in suggesting that he had links with McLaren.
"Filippo Marchino is a judge, he was very nasty during the hearing, was acting as a prosecutor," said Briatore as he read off a piece of paper in his hand.
"And after, we found out what is the reason why so nasty, this guy. He is very linked with McLaren."
Briatore said that he felt the situation was "very unfair".
He added "we have a nice picture of this guy at a speech for McLaren in 2018 in MSO, Beverly Hills", although without showing the piece of paper.
"He has a foundation, it's called One Drop Foundation, and McLaren gave two, three McLaren cars," Briatore added. "This was quite unfair."
This remark about the cars specifically is linked to a charity auction that was held in 2019 for the One Drop Foundation, of which Marchino sits on the board of directors.
One Drop was created by Guy Laliberte, the co-founder of Cirque du Soleil, who has long had ties to McLaren as a friend of former McLaren supremo Ron Dennis.
So, there is clear logic in it obtaining items from McLaren as part of the charity auction that Briatore referenced.
McLaren's anger
Briatore's remarks not only took the FIA and the media present by surprise, but they clearly infuriated McLaren team principal Andrea Stella, who gave an angry response to suggestions that there was anything untoward at play.
"I find that this conference going in this direction is quite insulting for McLaren, for the reputation of a team that deserves a lot of respect," said Stella.
"If anybody makes these kind of allegations - which seem quite serious - they are going to have to take the responsibility for what they are saying in a public forum.
"The hearing, the whole International Court of Appeal, was conducted to the highest standards and we should not question this phase like it’s been done."
Briatore suggested that the matter was not closed though, as he hinted that Alpine might considering taking the matter further.
"We’ve been thinking about it," he said. "Just pass the weekend and after that we think about it. For the moment, I don’t know."
What next?
Quite what Alpine's options could be is unclear, because the FIA's International Court of Appeal is the highest authority - and parties cannot appeal what it decides.
However, there is a right of review element that is similar to normal stewards' verdicts where decisions can be challenged if any "important new evidence is discovered which was unknown at the outset of the case before the ICA".
Briatore suggested Alpine knew nothing about the alleged links until after the hearing.
"We found out, after the meeting, logically, not before," he said. "We found out this guy was linked with the McLaren team."
It is unclear if what Briatore said is new information would be enough to cross the threshold for a right of review, because the FIA made clear on Friday that the make-up of the judging panel is put through a strong vetting process.
The International Court of Appeal has a roster of 36 leading legal experts, with at least eight of them selected to be part of a pool that can be picked for each case.
This pool is communicated to relevant parties well ahead of time to see if there are any "serious and objective reasons to consider that any or all of the shortlisted judges should be recused due to the existence of a conflict of interest or other legitimate grounds".
At no point in this process did Alpine offer any objection about who the shortlisted judges were, and that meant the president of the ICA - Monaco's Laurent Anselmi - went ahead and selected four for the hearing.
Interestingly, as part of F1's regulations, at least one of the judges involved in an ICA hearing that relates to the world championship must have been elected to the pool at the FIA's general assembly on proposal from at least five teams or three manufacturers.
Back in 2023, Marchino (as well as Luigi Fumagalli, who was also a judge in the Monaco appeal hearing) was nominated at the FIA's general assembly after being proposed by teams.
Any judges proposed by teams are subject to a due diligence check by the FIA compliance officer, and are then reviewed by an ad hoc panel before recommendations are made to the eligibility assessment committee.
Beyond this initial assessment, when judges are called up to specific cases they must confirm to the FIA's secretary general that they are not affected by any conflict of interest.
Only once this is complete will the final make-up of the ICA judging panel be finalised, with it then kept secret from everyone involved in the case until the day of the hearing.
With the hearing finished and the ICA verdict now out, the F1 paddock must wait a little longer to see if a three-month fight over the Monaco GP podium is prolonger further still.
