Premier League clubs have reacted with anger and a demand for clarity after Newcastle’s chairman, Yasir al-Rumayyan, was described in a US court document as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”. It has led to Amnesty International calling for the league to re-examine the assurances given by Newcastle’s owners that the Saudi state would not have control of the club. There is dismay from the majority of clubs in the division who, the Guardian understands, will write to the league to outline their concerns. They want the matter to be an agenda item at the next shareholders’ meeting on 30 March so that it can be discussed in detail. The document filed this week raised fresh questions about the level of separation between the Saudi state and the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which bought an 80% stake in Newcastle in October 2021 and whose governor is Rumayyan. A brief filed in a court case involving the PGA Tour and LIV Golf describes the PIF as “a sovereign instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” and Rumayyan as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”. The development appears to have stirred longstanding fears of many clubs about the PIF takeover. When it was signed off, the other 19 clubs demanded an emergency meeting with the league, wanting to understand why the deal had been approved. They had previously believed it was blocked and were stunned to learn via the media that it was to be waved through. Shortly afterwards, the clubs also voted in rules to prevent Newcastle from striking high-value sponsorship deals with Saudi companies that were related to the owners – known as related party transactions. The arrival of new billionaire owners was always likely to upset clubs who saw on the horizon a far more competitive Newcastle and the prospect of the wealth at St James’ Park inflating transfer fees and wages. Since the takeover Newcastle have spent a net £241m on permanent signings. Under Eddie Howe they are fifth in the league and reached the Carabao Cup final, which they lost to Manchester United. Many clubs were frustrated by the lack of communication over the Newcastle takeover, which led to their forcing out the league’s then chairman, Gary Hoffman. More broadly, there has long been a determination to ensure financial fair play or profit and sustainability rules are enforced. When the league approved the Newcastle takeover, it said it did so after receiving “legally binding assurances” that the Saudi state would not have control of the club. The human rights group Amnesty has called on the league to ask new questions of Newcastle’s owners. “It was always stretching credulity to breaking point to imagine that the Saudi state wasn’t directing the buyout of Newcastle with the ultimate aim of using the club as a component in its wider sportswashing efforts,” Peter Frankental, Amnesty UK’s economic affairs director, said. “There’s an unmistakable irony in the sovereign wealth fund declaration emerging in a dispute about another arm of Saudi Arabia’s growing sports empire, but the simple fact is that Saudi sportswashing is affecting numerous sports and governing bodies need to respond to it far more effectively. “The Premier League will surely need to re-examine the assurances made about the non-involvement of the Saudi authorities in the Newcastle deal.” The PIF is chaired by the Saudi prime minister, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, with eight of the nine PIF board members listed on the fund’s website as being a government minister or royal adviser. Rumayyan is the exception. Yet it is inconceivable that the league did not know he was a minister when it sanctioned the takeover – not least because the PIF’s law documents make it clear that the governor must hold the rank of government minister. The league’s chief executive, Richard Masters, told the BBC in November 2021 that if his organisation found evidence there was state involvement in the running of Newcastle “we can remove the consortium as owners of the club”. The league, Newcastle and the PIF declined to comment. The PIF is challenging an order to produce documents and testify in the LIV Golf case. On Thursday the Newcastle director Amanda Staveley said the club’s owners were considering buying controlling and minority stakes in other clubs to “grow Newcastle and our brand”. It is understood Newcastle have held preliminary discussions with the French club Dijon over a potential investment, having been linked with Polish club Slask Wroclaw. “We’re looking at everything in terms of how we grow Newcastle and our brand,” she told the Financial Times’s Business of Football Summit. “The opportunity to buy players early in the cycle is critical to our growth. We’re very focused on young players so obviously we have looked at multi-club. “But whenever you look at multi-club you have to make sure that you have the right fit – you also make sure that you choose your territory carefully and have the right chemistry. You’re working with another fanbase in another area so it’s critical that you set out what your goals will be. It’s complicated.” Staveley added: “We’re also looking at another structure which would allow us to do maybe both [buy controlling and minority stakes], maybe something that would give us more opportunity to work with a lot more clubs. But that’s quite an early stage. I think that any buyer who is now looking to buy any club is going to be looking at the multi-club model.” NUFC Fans Against Sportswashing, a Newcastle fans’ group, added their voice to the growing chorus of concern on Thursday evening. “Since the takeover we have said the Premier League should never have allowed the deal to go through, as it meant a sovereign state would be in control of Newcastle United,” the statement said. “Now we have in black and white what we knew all along.” “The news means that the ‘legal and binding assurances’ that the PIF gave the Premier League to facilitate the takeover, that the Saudi government would not interfere in the running of the club were not true, as it has been admitted in court that Yasir al-Rumayyan is a government minister.”