Title of the Article

Everything was legal. There were flaws in the procedure. No one provided evidence and the affected parties did not complain, and as a result, Lionel Messi's four-game suspension was lifted, which would have kept him out of the final stage of the 2018 World Cup qualifiers and would have left Argentina without the best player in the world.

However, was everything correct? No, surely it was not. There was an insult, there was an insult. He deserved a punishment, he deserved it.

For example, apartheid was legal, as was slavery or the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany or the expulsion of Palestinians by Israel, but...

There is a widespread belief that what is legal is correct, and that is not always the case. The law and ethics are sometimes arrows pointing in the opposite direction. What is legal is what is allowed, regulated, or prohibited by laws, codes, and regulations. What is just, honest, and ethical is what should have been done correctly.

If Messi said "la concha de su madre (sic)" to the Brazilian linesman, it is true. It happened. It was real. It is not an invention. He did not shout the insult into the air, as the player initially believed the world was stupid. He said it to his face without hesitation. It was evident. It is undeniable.

Therefore, the FIFA disciplinary committee decided to punish him with a four-game ban and a fine of 10,000 Swiss francs (almost 30 million pesos).
It was correct to punish him, but they did not do it legally. Lawyers' territory, moving between clauses, articles, and interpretations of facts and rules to disprove evidence and demand others.

The Argentine legal team did their part, the legal part, and argued that if there was an insult, why did the Brazilian referee Sandro Ricci not report it in his match report? If the assistant referee Emerson do Carvalho understood what Messi said - due to his extensive international experience - why did he not report it or give it importance?

Since the verbal aggression was not reported, it could not be punished automatically, since everything was known by the referee Messi spoke to face to face.
The disciplinary committee can only sanction "serious offenses that officials did not notice." And it was clear that they noticed the insult, but did not report it.

As a result, the FIFA appeals committee nullified everything. They even removed the fine. In practice, Messi was owed a game ban, which he served against Bolivia, in La Paz. "The available evidence was not sufficient," it was explained. The video of the insult was more than enough, but...

It was legal, yes; but it was not correct. Don't doubt it for a second. Messi insulted and therefore deserved a sanction. And if FIFA does not have disciplinary laws that allow them to punish automatically and with video evidence, for example, they should include them.
If video technology is already being used on the field to prevent injustices, if the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) will be used in a historic way at the World Cup in Russia, why can't video and other evidence be used in courtrooms to prevent injustices?

FIFA should include this in its laws, in the code of conduct! I reviewed that code. Obviously, I am not a lawyer. There (article 49) it talks about a four-game ban, including the automatic one, for insulting an official and being expelled, as happened to the Chilean Medel. As César Augusto Londoño, my possessed spirit of a jurist colleague on Conexión deportes on the Win Sports channel, told me, Messi was not sent off and therefore did not deserve those four games of suspension.

This legalization of justice is a cancer of modern society. Examples of injustices committed in the name of the law abound. Messi deserved a punishment (in my humble opinion, maybe two games). A punishment that was right, but was not legal.