May 28, 2022



On 5th May 2022 ESIC issued a Notice of Charge (“NOC”) to Luis “peacemaker” Tadeu and provisionally suspended him from all ESIC member events pending final determination of the notified charges against him arising from his interaction with the Free-Roam Spectator Bug encountered in CS:GO competition in March 2018.

ESIC Commissioner, Ian Smith, received and reviewed Mr Tadeu’s reply to the charge and determined as follows:

  • On balance of probabilities, Mr Tadeu satisfied the Commissioner that he did not use the bug to cheat or gain any advantage over the opponents in the relevant match. Consequently, the charge of breach of Art 2.4.4 of the Code of Conduct has been withdrawn.
  • Mr Tadeu accepts that he is guilty of breach of Art 2.4.5 of the Code of Conduct inasmuch as he failed to take appropriate action during or after the relevant match to bring the bug to the attention of the relevant authorities.
  • Consequently, the Commissioner offered and Mr Tadeu accepted a sanction of time served (22 days) under provisional suspension as the appropriate sanction for his breach (see Commissioner’s note below for further insight into the sanction imposed on Mr Tadeu).

ESIC makes this statement as the public notification of a Final Determination in the Free-Roam Spectator Bug matter concerning Mr Tadeu.



In making its Final Determination, ESIC relied upon the following evidence:

 Luis “peacemaker” Tadeu:

Did not act in an appropriate manner in response to a CS:GO free roam camera bug on 6 March 2018 during a match between Heroic and Imperial held at the ECS Season 5 Europe Challenger Cup (Conduct).


Team Enemy Team Tournament Date Map Round Start Round End Total Rounds Match Link Video Link
Heroic Imperial ECS Season 5 Europe Challenger Cup 6-Mar-18 Inferno 1-0 2-0 1 Link



 Final Determined Sanction: Suspension from all ESIC Member events for a period of 22 days ending 26th May 2022 (time served under provisional suspension).



“In response to ESIC’s Notice of Charge notifying Mr Tadeu of ESIC’s intended sanctions against him for his Conduct, Mr Tadeu promptly provided a comprehensive and detailed reply including expert testimony and character evidence. I found the evidence compelling, and this resulted in me issuing a Final Determination setting out the lesser charge of breach of Article 2.4.5 of the ESIC Code of Conduct.

 It is my strongly held view that, as senior stewards of the game of CS:GO and influential members of the CS:GO and esports community, people in Mr Tadeu’s position owe a professional duty of care to the game and the community to act responsibly and appropriately to protect the integrity of the game. In this case, I found that Mr Tadeu’s behaviour with respect to the bug fell short of the required standard and his acceptance of guilt on this lesser charge is to his credit.

In determining the sanction, I was mindful that Mr Tadeu missed the Antwerp Major as a result of PGL and Valve’s decision to suspend him from the event and, consequently, whilst conduct of the kind Mr Tadeu engaged in should ordinarily result in a higher sanction of more than 22 days suspension, in these particular circumstances, I believe 22 days is appropriate and proportionate.”



On 5 May 2022, ESIC issued a release contextualising upcoming sanction activity relating to the Historical Spectator Bug Investigation. Importantly, ESIC set out its stances on each of the three Spectator Bug Variants (Static, Free Roam, Third Person) as well as its intended penalty mechanism. It is apparent to ESIC that, notwithstanding ESIC’s detailed statement made on 5 May 2022, there may be residual confusion regarding the way that ESIC has dealt with the Spectator Bug Variants.

In the general public interest, ESIC sets out a further explanatory note below:

When issuing a charge against a participant for the Static or Third Person Spectator Bug Variants, it was noted that ESIC does not view the outcome of an unfair advantage being achieved as a necessary factor of the threat created by the two variants. Rather, the mere potential for exploitation and its utilisation by the affected participants created an opportunity for an unfair advantage which should have been immediately rectified. ESIC firmly holds the view that it is not only reasonably necessary, but a basic expectation of any participant operating in a professional setting to immediately rectify any form of game breaking bug or occurrence that should otherwise not have occurred. ESIC will continue to hold participants to this most basic standard of competitive integrity.

 Noting the above, ESIC clearly distinguished, in its release on 5 May 2022, the Free Roam Bug as a Spectator Bug Variant which ESIC intended to penalise as a cheating offense under the Code of Conduct.

As stated in the release of 5 May 2022: “In the Commissioner’s view, an affected participant utilising the Free Roam variant intentionally can reasonably be said to have been engaging in a behaviour that was cheating or attempting to cheat to win a Game or Match, which is far more serious than the other two Spectator Bug Variants.”

Accordingly, it is abundantly clear that any notice of charge issued for a Free-Roam instance of the Spectator Bug Variant reasonably asserts that the participant engaged in behaviour that was cheating or an attempt to cheat to win a Game or Match. Therefore, it follows, that any such charge (unlike those set out for the Static or Third Person Spectator Bug Variants) asserts that the outcome of an unfair advantage being achieved is a necessary precondition for the charge being established.



ESIC has not received any appeals relating to its notices of charge. It has, however, received replies to its notices of charge. In the general public interest, ESIC sets out a short explanatory note identifying the process undertaken for the recent sanction activity, related to the Historical Spectator Bug Investigation, carried out from 5 May 2022 onwards.

Process of notifying a charge and resolving a final determination:

  1. ESIC notifies individuals via a Notice of Charge (sets out offending conduct, the intended sanction and grants a window opportunity for a reply).
  2. ESIC makes a public interest disclosure (PID) relating to its intended sanction activity regarding the participants, with the detail ESIC deems as being required, to serve the public interest purpose.
  3. Respondent may reply within the reply window.
  4. ESIC assesses any reply received, engages with respondent (if appropriate).
  5. ESIC notifies respondent of final determination regarding notified charge (usually in the form of a Final Determination Notice) and notifies respondent of appeal mechanism available to them with the Independent Appeals Panel.
  6. ESIC makes, at its sole discretion, a final release notifying the result of the Final Determination Notice.

In the scenario of the notices handed to three coaches on 6 May 2022, it is important to note that:

  1. The Notices of Charge are not a charge or sanction against the participants. Rather they are notices of an intended charge with an intended sanction.
  2. The Notices of Charge may include provisional suspensions in circumstances where participation, by the charged individual, in ESIC Member Events is undesirable in that it may be reasonably said to further jeopardise the competitive integrity or reputation of ESIC’s Member Events.
    1. Importantly: ESIC’s duty is to the competitive integrity of its Member Events. Accordingly, ESIC will always take the necessary actions to mitigate such exposure to its Members, including but not limited to imposing a provisional suspension. ESIC does not, and has no desire to, mandate the observation of its provisional suspensions on any non-member. Any such voluntary observation is solely the decision of the non-member.
  3. In the instance of the Free-Roam Spectator Bug Variant, it would be entirely unreasonable to suggest that an individual who is notified about ESIC’s intended sanction regarding an alleged cheating offence should go without a provisional suspension pending ESIC’s Final Determination. Put simply, when ESIC is of the view that there is sufficient and compelling evidence (irrespective of the passage of time required to build the case to ESIC’s satisfaction), ESIC will notify the individual about the case being made against them. Following that, ESIC may choose to provisionally suspend the individual from participation in ESIC Member Events, if such participation creates a threat to competitive integrity whether perceived or actual.



ESIC seeks to issue a reminder to all participants interacting with ESIC regarding sanctioning activities, that it is inappropriate to publicly comment regarding a confidential matter prior to ESIC issuing a Final Determination. This includes but is not limited to details of discussions, negotiations, evidence, agreements or other matters relating to the resolution of a charge against a participant. Any such premature public comment may, in itself, constitute a breach of the Code.