On 11 September 2024, Miguel Angel Galan, the president of the National Centre for Training of Football Coaches of Spain (CENAFE), sparked an internet frenzy by exposing a controversial “pre-sexual consent contract” that has stirred intense debate across Spain. This document, allegedly used by several professional football players in the La Liga division, aims to formalise every aspect of sexual encounters through detailed clauses, including one labelled “accidental violation.”

The contract’s emergence follows a series of high-profile scandals involving sexual misconduct in the world of football, raising serious concerns about its implications for consent and women’s rights.

With the number of public sexual assault and rape cases involving footballers rising sharply in recent years, Head of the School for the Education of Managers (CENAFE) Miguel Angel Galan has published a consent form that he claims is now regular process for footballers having…

— Kyama (@ElijahKyama_) September 11, 2024

Aquí podéis ver el "Contrato de Consentimiento" para mantener relaciones sexuales que circula entre los futbolistas de Primera División. Saquen sus propias conclusiones, pero el apartado violación accidental me parece aberrante. 👇 pic.twitter.com/xpbMyrDOYt

— Miguel Galan (@MiguelGalanCNFE) September 10, 2024

The idea behind the sexual consent contract is to provide a written agreement that outlines the specifics of a sexual encounter, ostensibly to protect individuals from future allegations. The contract, a three-page document in English, requires both parties to identify themselves, acknowledge mutual attraction, and detail their intentions for the encounter.

This detail includes listing every sexual act they plan to engage in and decisions regarding contraception. The contract even includes “exit clauses” that void the agreement if anything unexpected occurs, necessitating a new contract to be drafted.

The most controversial aspect of the contract is Clause VI, which introduces the concept of “accidental violation.” Yes, you read that correctly. According to this clause, if something occurs that wasn’t specifically agreed upon, the burden of proof falls on the male party. Yet, the act would not be considered sexual violence if retroactive affirmative consent is given. This clause has sparked outrage due to its legal ambiguity and potential to undermine the very concept of consent.

As shocking as this contract may sound, its implications are even more alarming. The idea that there are football players out there who are using this contract to shield themselves from accountability raises serious red flags about the protection (or lack thereof) that these agreements offer to women.

Moreover, do I need to point out the fact that this year alone there have been numerous sexual assault allegations against footballers from different clubs and countries? The suggestion of “accidental violation” is not only a legal minefield but also an affront to the very definition of consent, undermining a woman’s autonomy and ability to withdraw consent at any time.

In order to gain greater insight into the legal ramifications of this contract, SCREENSHOT reached out to well-known Italian lawyer Alberto Mittone. Mittone pointed out that such contracts would likely have limited value in many legal systems. In Italy, for example, criminal offences cannot be excluded by civil agreements. Mittone emphasised that the psychological intent behind an act—whether it was committed with intent or negligence—remains crucial, and a pre-existing contract does not diminish the severity of criminal behaviour, stating: “The contract is cleverly designed to protect both parties, but certainly more so the male, from potential consequences. If we were in Italy, it would have limited value, as criminal offences cannot be excluded by violating civil agreements.”

“All of this is to say that this contractual solution must be adapted to each country, each with its own civil and criminal legal systems. For Italians, it would have little value because what matters is the psychological element—whether the act was committed intentionally or negligently. Any resulting criminal offence (violence, physical harm) that exceeds the boundaries of the agreement would not be diminished by a prior contract,” Mittone went on to say.

The broader implications of this contract extend beyond Spain. If similar agreements were to spread to other countries, they could further complicate global discussions on consent and sexual misconduct. The potential for these contracts to undermine women’s rights and legal protections is significant.

Interestingly, this isn’t the first time we’ve heard discussions about sexual contract agreements. Back in 2004, following sexual assault allegations against Lakers star Kobe Bryant, some athletes revealed that they would only engage in sexual activity after having a waiver agreement signed. Then in 2014, Apple faced controversy and removed an app from its stores that allowed users to give affirmative consent. Later, in 2018, a Dutch start-up launched LegalFling, further fueling the conversation around formalising sexual consent.

In short, this contract seems like a desperate attempt by some men to shield themselves from accountability. And given that football players already have a global reputation for poor treatment of women, this latest development only worsens the situation.