This item is to discuss suspension of player Francesco Tarditi of France from all CFC events
This item is to discuss suspension of player Francesco Tarditi of France from all CFC events
We have received credible information that Francesco Tarditi of France in Canada and Montreal specifically on a student visa in October 2023 and earlier engaged in some activities which cannot be tolerated in any venue and certainly not at a chess tournament that is CFC rated. The allegations included taking pictures of girls and young women under a table at a CFC rated event which violated their privacy. One of the girls was a minor. There were other pictures that indicated that this was part of a larger pattern of behaviour. When the pictures were discovered, police were contacted. Mr. Tarditi left the country in the middle of the school year. Mr. Tarditi's mother called one of the people who discovered the pictures and indicated that they were over-reacting.
Mr. Tarditi has not been convicted of a crime, however, if he does return to Canada we cannot ignore this situation and we cannot in good conscience let him proceed and play in a CFC event while representing a clear and present danger to girls and young women. If he returns to Canada, he can request a hearing with the CFC board and we can hear and deal with his case. Until such time, he is banned from playing in CFC rated events and banned from attending CFC tournaments.
I agree with this stance. However, I just checked the CFC players' ratings list and see that he is still listed. His CFC expiry date simply shows a hyphen, i.e. no information. There is nothing to inform a tournament organizer that Mr. Tarditi is banned. The organizer could mistakenly collect a tournament registration fee and a CFC membership fee from Mr. Tarditi and not realize his mistake until it's too late. I suggest we have a flag in the ratings list that provides more clarity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec
He is an FQE player and they have been informed initially about the situation. One of the projects on the table is a new rating system program and there should be a way to flag such individuals. He is not in the country currently. Once we have voting member approval we will inform FIDE where he is still playing but we will need more than we have at this moment to pursue it at the FIDE level. This is a first step.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Clarke
Hopefully he gets some help for his issues. The most disturbing thing is that he doesn't think that his behaviour is so bad that it should have gotten the response that it did. People can be strange.
Since I expect you will be meeting several officials from FIDE at the Candidates I would expect one of them would be able to tell you who the "go to" person at FIDE is on this?
We have the names of arbiters where he has been playing. We will likely start with the FIDE office. The victims may be reluctant to pursue it but we can put people on notice by banning him from the CFC and following up. Having the voting members affirm our decision simply removes an avenue of appeal later as we are not really expecting a situation like this to arise at a tournament in Canada but it has.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle Craver
First, I of course agree this incident requires serious reaction from the CFC. Second, I agree with Brian Clarke's recommendation that there be some kind of very clear suspension designation, so that the player cannot accidentally sneak into a future event. Third, such mechanisms must be auto-coordinate-able with the FQE.
Having said all that, I remain concerned about CFC process bullet-proof-ness. Whereas I believe the CFC Executive has managed this situation as best as could reasonably be expected, from what I gather, the CFC still lacks constitutional framework for ethical matters in general. The FQE has an Ethics process, we do not.
I remain concerned that without such framework and process, that we remain weaker than we could be when confronting even the most gross unethical behaviour.
Therefore, as previously mentioned, I encourage the CFC to explore this area more.
Please appreciate this post does not diminish my support for how the CFC reacted!
We do have an ethics provision in the old handbook. They just never elected the people to serve, ever, as far as I know. I believe the masters rep is automatically on the committee. I think it has to be the CFC board of directors that handles these cases and this is not really ethics, this is responding to what is alleged criminal behaviour. We are covered by our discipline procedure and by the NFP act which does have some provisions which could be applied in such situations. We do need to clean up our discipline provisions as they only apply to members and so you can let your CFC membership lapse and you are immune to discipline in theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aris Marghetis
Good evening,
I agree with the CFC decision on this matter. However, I would appreciate it if the CFC could clarify their position regarding GM Timur Gareyev, who has faced multiple sexual misconduct complaints (https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/b...lence/ZNTniBEA). Mr. Gareyev has been permanently banned by the USCF. Will the CFC establish mechanisms for exchanging information with the USCF?
Regards,
Golubeva Oksana, WFM
We do exchange information with the USCF. We also visit their website. We talk to them often though not in the last month as other things occupied our attention. I am a member of the USCF entitled to vote in their elections. I had seen the report about Gareyev though it was not the ban which went into effect more recently. I saw it when I was looking for disciplinary action against a Canadian though I did not connect it to this situation. It was just a name on a website who seemed to be punished lightly for something which they did not specify.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oksana Golubeva
I think what we can learn from the USCF in this instance is not to behave as the USCF did and allow a person with such a record to be able to walk anonymously through the world without a care.