F1's Freedom Crackdown: Have Drivers Been Silenced Too Much?

The FIA (Federation Internationale de l'Automobile) has overseen Formula 1 since the first official grand prix in 1946 and the subsequent creation of the World Drivers Championship in 1950. However, in recent years, the FIA has increasingly been condemned for penalties and rules applied to drivers, culminating in a statement from the GPDA (Grand Prix Drivers Association) on November 7, in which they criticized the strict rules and monetary fines drivers face. This article focuses on three specific controversies: (1) Jewellery Ban (2022); (2) Curtailment of Drivers’ Activism (2023); and (3) Swearing Ban (2024).

The jewellery ban first made headlines at the 2022 Miami Grand Prix. Prior to this event, Niels Wittich, the race director at the time, announced that he would not allow drivers to wear body jewellery in the car, and that random checks would be carried out to ensure that drivers complied with this rule. There was also a ban on non-compliant undergarments, with the rules stating that they had to be fireproof. These rules had been in the regulations since 2005, but were only enforced in 2022. The rule regarding jewellery specifically stated that ‘the wearing of jewellery in the form of body piercing or metal neck chains is prohibited during the competition and may therefore be checked before the start”. One of the drivers who was extremely opposed to this regulation was Lewis Hamilton, and as a result, he attended the pre-weekend press conference wearing numerous bracelets, watches, chains, and rings. He said that he felt as if drivers should “be able to be who [they] are”. As his jewellery was not magnetic, and he had raced with it before, he did not believe it was a major issue. The FIA and race director disagreed with him on this, stating that there were safety issues, such as the jewellery melting and causing a serious injury if there is fire involved in a crash. The jewellery, and non-fireproof garments, could also reduce the protection offered by the fireproof clothing, become a choking hazard for a driver, snag on the helmet, balaclava, or overalls, and make it harder to provide first aid. They believed that the presence of jewellery was a significant risk, and there would be increased dangers should a driver be wearing it in an accident. Whilst Hamilton was eventually granted a medical exemption due to concerns over potential disfigurement if he repeatedly removed a nose piercing, many felt that the sudden enforcement of the rules unfairly targeted him, as he was one of the only drivers who wore jewellery when racing. The FIA dismissed these accusations, with the president Mohammed Ben Sulayem claiming that they were friends, but this was just the start of numerous disputes between drivers and the FIA.

The next serious issue came late into the 2022 season, when the FIA introduced a policy that banned drivers from making ‘political, religious and personal’ statements from being made at Grand Prix events. Drivers were still allowed to express their views in their own spaces, like social media platforms, but if they did so whilst on track – such as during the national anthem before the race or on the podium – they would face financial penalisation. After facing heavy backlash from numerous drivers, with Lewis Hamilton declaring that he would still be ‘speaking [his] mind’ and Lando Norris accusing the FIA of treating the drivers like school children, the policy was clarified before the beginning of the 2023 season. The FIA said that drivers, in exceptional circumstances, could  submit a request to make a statement, however the request would have to be submitted four weeks in advance. Mohammed Ben Sulayem fully backed the ban, and insisted that he did not want Formula 1 to become a platform for ‘political activism’.

Nevertheless, this ban is widely damaging both for the FIA’s reputation, and progress made to encourage equality so far. Formula 1 is a worldwide sport, and has a very diverse audience, and by limiting the drivers from raising awareness on issues like climate change, human rights, and racial discrimination, there is a risk of losing key stakeholders and diminishing F1’s role as a platform for positive change. If the FIA punishes a driver for expressing their views at an event, it will reflect negatively on them for opposing activism and inhibiting positive influence.

The latest of Formula 1’s rules to cause controversy is the newly introduced swearing ban, which was first enforced when Max Verstappen was penalised and given community service by the FIA for using inappropriate language during the drivers’ press conference in Singapore. The rule came as Mohammed Ben Sulayem aimed to create a more ‘polished’ image of the sport, and wanted to differentiate between ‘motorsport and rap music’. Yet again, the rule received criticism from drivers, with Lewis Hamilton labelling the penalty as a ‘little bit of a joke’, as well as alluding to the fact the comment had racial undertones and used ‘stereotypical’ language, since ‘most rappers are black’. Other drivers also felt that the penalty was unreasonable, stating that they believed swearing in the heat of the moment is a natural thing to do when pressurised, and that swearing about an inanimate object like an F1 car is different from swearing with the intent of criticising another driver. The sudden change of opinion on the topic of swearing was also noted on by the chairman of the GDPA, Alex Wurz, who commented on the way ex-Team Principal Guenther Steiner was glorified for using the F-word, so much so that it become a major part of his personality and way for fans to recognise him by. In the post-race press conference at the Mexico GP, Charles Leclerc swore, and was fined €10,000, whilst Lando Norris and George Russel were given a €5000 fine for an unrelated aborted start infringement at the Brazilian GP. In the aborted start infringement, there were marshals and recovery vehicles on track, and the safety of multiple people was compromised, yet the penalty was lighter than it was for accidentally swearing. While it is understandable that broadcasters have guidelines to safeguard against swearing during a live broadcast, in the heat of sport, like life, swearing is a natural thing to many, and punishing a driver for it is unnecessary and can discourage drivers from revealing their true opinions and speaking their mind.

Governing a complex sport like Formula 1 can be an extremely challenging thing to do, and the FIA indeed has the best interests of the sport at heart. They are responsible for ensuring that Formula 1 remains the worldwide extravaganza that it has been for so many years, and keep it free from controversy that could potentially tarnish their image. However, sportsmanship guidelines are designed to maintain order and safety, not to stifle the drivers and make them hesitant to reveal their views. Drivers are influential public figures, and by silencing them, a huge opportunity for informing people about major issues is wasted. This can also be a turnoff to fans, who previously connected with drivers over their opinions. The FIA claims to prioritise safety and professionalism, yet recently the hyperfixation on smaller issues like a casual swear word have overshadowed bigger concerns about driver safety and on-track stewarding. This raises questions as to whether the FIA is working in the best interest of Formula 1, or whether they have their own agenda.

(Cover image courtesy of Planet F1)