5A-2 Discussion items - Suspension of player Francesco Tarditi of France

[Lyle Craver]

This item is to discuss suspension of player Francesco Tarditi of France from all CFC events

[Vladimir Drkulec]

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.

[Brian Clarke]

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.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

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.

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.

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.

[Lyle Craver]

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?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

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.

[Aris Marghetis]

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!

[Vladimir Drkulec]

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.

[Oksana Golubeva]

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/breaking-the-silence/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

[Vladimir Drkulec]

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/breaking-the-silence/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.

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.

[ian findlay]

On the surface I certainly agree with the action of the CFC, but I also believe in our judicial system which says 'Innocent until proven guilty'. I strongly support the CFC in bringing this matter to justice and I understand if we do not get all the facts here. I do have a hard time saying the person is guilty until I hear all the evidence, but it would arguably be a lot worse if he was allowed to play again. The CFC executive's decision seems right as stated below.

'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.' Yes, this seems prudent and seems the least we can do at this time. I assume our lawyer, Patricia, agrees with this action.

[Olga Mushtaler]

Oksana, I believe we should start in our own courtyard. Last time I checked, shouting 'Stop shaking your ass, Olga!' by a National Arbiter is considered verbal sexual harassment.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

On the surface I certainly agree with the action of the CFC, but I also believe in our judicial system which says 'Innocent until proven guilty'. I strongly support the CFC in bringing this matter to justice and I understand if we do not get all the facts here. I do have a hard time saying the person is guilty until I hear all the evidence, but it would arguably be a lot worse if he was allowed to play again. The CFC executive's decision seems right as stated below.

'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.' Yes, this seems prudent and seems the least we can do at this time. I assume our lawyer, Patricia, agrees with this action.

Patricia is a lawyer but she is not our lawyer. She did agree with this decision and voted for it. The vote was lopsided with no one voting against it. Veronica was not yet on the board but she brought the situation to our attention.

This simply cannot happen and be tolerated. This suspends the player pending a hearing which he is unlikely to request. We do not require a criminal conviction to suspend someone. Once we deal with him on the CFC level we can move forward and deal with him on the FIDE level.

[ian findlay]

Patricia is a lawyer but she is not our lawyer. She did agree with this decision and voted for it. The vote was lopsided with no one voting against it. Veronica was not yet on the board but she brought the situation to our attention.

This simply cannot happen and be tolerated. This suspends the player pending a hearing which he is unlikely to request. We do not require a criminal conviction to suspend someone. Once we deal with him on the CFC level we can move forward and deal with him on the FIDE level.

I agree. Thanks for the clarification.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

What is the point of this motion?

"suspended" - from what?

Do the Board go forward with this motion and try to avoid some kind of the "counter-motion"

Member Discipline
"The board decision may be overturned by a simple majority of class A voting members at the next quarterly meeting or alternatively in a special meeting called for by the board or 5% of the class A voting members."

Though this might not even be applicable as the person probably was not even the CFC member.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

What is the point of this motion?

"suspended" - from what?

Do the Board go forward with this motion and try to avoid some kind of the "counter-motion"

Member Discipline
"The board decision may be overturned by a simple majority of class A voting members at the next quarterly meeting or alternatively in a special meeting called for by the board or 5% of the class A voting members."

Though this might not even be applicable as the person probably was not even the CFC member.

The point of this motion is that this is the opportunity for the voting members to overturn our decision. It is housekeeping and covering our bases in that it strengthens our decision and lessens the possibility of a successful appeal on the basis that we didn't put it to the voting members. Most decisions of the board that don't fall exclusively within the purview of the board expire at the next meeting of the voting members if they are not presented for approval or at least discussed at the next meeting.

This person is not a CFC member but is an FQE member. We cannot discipline him in that regard but we do have dominion over what can and can't be CFC rated and by extension what can and cannot be FIDE rated within Canada. The FQE were just as appalled as we were over this situation so I am sure that there will likely be some discipline there as well and I would expect that he would not be allowed to play in FQE only rated events either.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Most decisions of the board that don't fall exclusively within the purview of the board expire at the next meeting of the voting members if they are not presented for approval or at least discussed at the next meeting.

That is for by-laws. This does not look a bylaw at all. The CFC board of directors accepts membership (of any kind). Thus it is fully within the power to issue the statement that the person will be not granted the membership, and then follows the consequences if he would play in the rated tournament - the tournament will be not rated etc.

Again: "suspended" - from what? The motion should be clear and not require to search and read elsewhere.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I think most clear thinking voting members can agree that we cannot allow individuals who want to take pictures of young underage girls and women under the table at CFC tournaments to do that. If we become aware of that after the fact we need to make sure it cannot happen again. The charges are extraordinary and require a strong response. The circumstances as explained to me can only be described as criminal behaviour though he has fled the country in the middle of his school year and is unlikely to face a trial over this. He is not in Canada at the moment and is unlikely to return however he is somewhere and apparently he does not see his actions as being wrong and what happened when he was discovered as being an over reaction. This is just the second step in a process that must reach into FIDE and into online communities.

The board is entitled to take actions in the best interest of chess in Canada. This is our response to this strange situation. There is no exact bylaw that can apply to this. You have a board of directors to deal with situations when the rules are unclear. We have dealt with it and the circumstances. You can register your approval, disapproval or abstain from either in respect to the board actions.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

I think most clear thinking voting members can agree that we cannot allow individuals who want to take pictures of young underage girls and women under the table at CFC tournaments to do that. If we become aware of that after the fact we need to make sure it cannot happen again. The charges are extraordinary and require a strong response. The circumstances as explained to me can only be described as criminal behaviour though he has fled the country in the middle of his school year and is unlikely to face a trial over this. He is not in Canada at the moment and is unlikely to return however he is somewhere and apparently he does not see his actions as being wrong and what happened when he was discovered as being an over reaction. This is just the second step in a process that must reach into FIDE and into online communities.

The board is entitled to take actions in the best interest of chess in Canada. This is our response to this strange situation. There is no exact bylaw that can apply to this. You have a board of directors to deal with situations when the rules are unclear. We have dealt with it and the circumstances. You can register your approval, disapproval or abstain from either in respect to the board actions.

You wrote while ago (like a month)

https://www.chesscanada.info/forum/showthread.php?6351-Francesco-Tarditi-is-suspended-indefinitely-from-CFC-play-for-safe-play-violations
Francesco Tarditi whose CFC ID is 177944 and FIDE ID is 373104530 is hereby suspended from participating as a player or spectator in Chess Federation of Canada sanctioned or rated Canadian chess tournaments indefinitely by a vote of the CFC board of directors. Mr. Tarditi was an FQE member. and we have informed the FQE of this case and we will inform FIDE as well. We received a disturbing report that this person has engaged in inappropriate behaviour and alleged criminal acts as a spectator at a CFC rated tournament in 2023 including the surreptitious inappropriate photography of young women without consent and with at least one girl being a minor. Inappropriate pictures were taken under a table without consent either with a camera or cell phone and were seen on his cell phone by an official of the Concordia University Chess Club. The police have been involved. Mr. Tarditi who was in Canada on a student visa has apparently left the country. If or when Mr. Tarditi presents himself inside Canada we will hold a hearing to review the evidence and hear from the witnesses to his actions. This suspension is in effect immediately. It can only be lifted by a future action of the board of directors or the voting members of the CFC.

Thus what the point of this motion? Any voting member tries to lift up the suspension?

Just for formality, the motion has no mover nor seconder.
Is it just a poll?

[Christopher Mallon]

Technical question, would it be possible to actually change his rating indicator to read BAN or something like that, so it's instantly obvious? Or will that break the pairings software? Might be worth an experiment. This isn't the first, nor will it be the last suspension the CFC has to issue. Thankfully it doesn't come up TOO often.

What is the actual motion we are voting on?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Technical question, would it be possible to actually change his rating indicator to read BAN or something like that, so it's instantly obvious? Or will that break the pairings software? Might be worth an experiment. This isn't the first, nor will it be the last suspension the CFC has to issue. Thankfully it doesn't come up TOO often.

What is the actual motion we are voting on?

1. The CFC board of directors have suspended Francesco Tarditi of France for violations of safe play. Mr. Tarditi can request a hearing on the suspension if and when he returns to Canada and deals with the police investigation in a satisfactory manner.

With regard to the suspension of Francesco Tarditi of France:

Option A: I agree with the board decision in this matter
Option B: I disagree with the board decision in this matter
Option C: Abstain

There is no end date specified for the suspension. If we do not act on this we are complicit in allowing his behaviour to continue.

[Don Parakin]

Technical question, would it be possible to actually change his rating indicator to read BAN or something like that, so it's instantly obvious? ...

Technical answer: In the current 25+ year old rating system the rating indicator field is of type integer so cannot (easily) indicate that the member is banned (and I personally do not want to touch any of this old code). A quick & dirty option is to simply append the string "(BANNED)" to the member's last name. Bob G could do this in JustGo. The way things are currently built an extract from JustGo is done to update the ratings system (an MS-Access app), then the ratings are run, then another extract from the ratings system is done to update chess.ca and tdlist.txt. So, the updated last name would flow through to being public (without any code changes). "(BANNED)" would appear on his own ratings page as well as on the crosstables of every CFC tournament he played in.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Technical answer: In the current 25+ year old rating system the rating indicator field is of type integer so cannot (easily) indicate that the member is banned (and I personally do not want to touch any of this old code). A quick & dirty option is to simply append the string "(BANNED)" to the member's last name. Bob G could do this in JustGo. The way things are currently built an extract from JustGo is done to update the ratings system (an MS-Access app), then the ratings are run, then another extract from the ratings system is done to update chess.ca and tdlist.txt. So, the updated last name would flow through to being public (without any code changes). "(BANNED)" would appear on his own ratings page as well as on the crosstables of every CFC tournament he played in.

I thought something like that would be the best way forward until we have new systems in place.

[Aris Marghetis]

Technical answer: In the current 25+ year old rating system the rating indicator field is of type integer so cannot (easily) indicate that the member is banned (and I personally do not want to touch any of this old code). A quick & dirty option is to simply append the string "(BANNED)" to the member's last name. Bob G could do this in JustGo. The way things are currently built an extract from JustGo is done to update the ratings system (an MS-Access app), then the ratings are run, then another extract from the ratings system is done to update chess.ca and tdlist.txt. So, the updated last name would flow through to being public (without any code changes). "(BANNED)" would appear on his own ratings page as well as on the crosstables of every CFC tournament he played in.

Thanks to Chris and Don for these ideas. I also fully support anything that can help-protect Organizers-Arbiters and of course tournament participants. Thumb-up.