When a team voluntarily imposes restrictions on itself that go beyond what the regulations require, it is not the confident statement of innocence it is dressed up to be. It is an admission. And Red Bull‘s Laurent Mekies has just handed the sport’s sceptics a very useful piece of ammunition.
The Letter That Forced a Response
McLaren CEO Zak Brown recently wrote to FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem raising concerns about Formula 1’s dual-team ownership model. Specifically, he questioned whether Red Bull GmbH owning both Red Bull Racing and Racing Bulls is compatible with genuine sporting independence. It is a concern that has bubbled under the surface for years, and Brown has now put it in writing.
His complaints are pointed: the rapid transfer of Mekies himself from Racing Bulls team principal to Red Bull Racing following Christian Horner’s departure in 2025; the signing of Andrea Landi; and the Miami Grand Prix moment where Liam Lawson handed a position back to Max Verstappen shortly after being forced off the road by the Red Bull car. The last one is particularly difficult to wave away.
Mekies’ Defence and Its Glaring Problem
Mekies insists Red Bull not only complies with FIA regulations but has voluntarily extended its own gardening leave periods to exceed the required minimums.
“We would be more than silly, knowing all the attention in the world that there is on this topic, to be thinking of having a treatment that would not be compatible with the sporting regulations.” – Laurent Mekies
Fair enough. But here is the uncomfortable implication: if the existing FIA rules were genuinely robust, there would be no need to go further. By bolting on extra restrictions, Red Bull is quietly conceding that the baseline framework leaves room for concern. That is not a reassurance. That is a confession dressed in compliance clothing.
The Miami Moment That Won’t Go Away
Mekies’ response to the Lawson-Verstappen incident was to invite journalists to study every on-track interaction between the two teams this season. He argues Racing Bulls is actually the hardest midfield car for Red Bull to pass, making it an unlikely candidate for cooperative behaviour.
It is a reasonable point on the surface. Brown’s ongoing campaign against rival team structures is hardly free from self-interest either. But “we find them difficult to pass most of the time” is not the same as “nothing irregular happened in Miami.”
A Problem That Predates Brown
This debate is not new. Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso were navigating similar questions back in 2006 to 2008. The difference now is that the competitive stakes are higher, the scrutiny is sharper, and the sport’s commercial credibility depends on battles feeling genuine.
Mekies’ self-imposed restrictions might satisfy the letter of the law. Whether they satisfy the spirit of what a two-team sport should look like is a rather different question, and one that is unlikely to disappear just because Red Bull has extended its own gardening leave policy.
