Rui Pinto to remain in Portugal witness protection after removal suspended
October 10, 2026 01:20
Portuguese authorities have suspended a decision to remove Rui Pinto from the country's witness protection programme, meaning the Football Leaks founder will remain under protection for the time being. Pinto, 37, had said the planned exit put him in a "life-threatening situation".
KEY CONTEXT
Pinto disclosed a tranche of confidential football documents, including emails and financial records, and in 2018 shared material with German magazine Der Spiegel that was used in investigations into Manchester City's finances and alleged breaches of financial fair play rules. Those enquiries contributed to a Premier League investigation; City were recently found guilty of all charges relating to breaches of the Premier League's financial regulations between the 2009-10 and 2017-18 seasons and have appealed the ruling.
Pinto entered Portugal's witness protection programme in 2020 after agreeing to co-operate with authorities and provide information obtained through the Football Leaks operation. He has described himself as a whistleblower but was convicted in Portugal of offences including illegal access to data and attempted extortion and given a four-year suspended sentence. He wore a bulletproof vest during his first trial in 2020, which was subject to heightened security measures. Earlier this year he was acquitted of 241 counts of illegally accessing email accounts belonging to a number of sports bodies, including Benfica.
WHY THE DECISION WAS REVERSED
Portugal's Ministry of Justice said the special security programmes commission had not adequately "notified" Pinto of the grounds for ending his protection or given him the opportunity to challenge that decision. The commission's initial decision has been reversed for now and Pinto will be given 10 days to assess a risk assessment conducted by the commission that indicates a low threat to his safety.
Pinto posted on X thanking Portugal's Minister of Justice, Rita Alarcao Judice, and saying the commission's initial decision had clearly violated the law and amounted to a "manifest abuse of power".