Ban questions CoA’s interpretation of FIFA statutes

That FIFA makes no mention of the committee of administrators (CoA), appointed by the Supreme Court to run the All India Football Federation (AIFF), in its media release or secretary-general Fatma Samoura’s letter on Tuesday is equally important. A delegation comprising representatives from FIFA and Asian Football Confederation (AFC) met CoA and FIFA-AFC have given inputs on the draft constitution to the committee. But for most of the time, FIFA has addressed correspondence, including the letter informing suspension, to Sunando Dhar, the acting general secretary of AIFF, and spoken to the sports ministry. It has also been consistent in stating that only AIFF’s general body can independently approve the constitution.

This after CoA told FIFA and AFC to write to it. FIFA does not allow for third-party interference and to it, CoA is not part of the Indian football family. That is why FIFA has asked for the CoA’s mandate to be repealed in full and AIFF’s administration to be in charge of daily affairs as a pre-condition to lifting the suspension.

By replying to a letter written by FIFA-AFC to AIFF’s acting general secretary, one that apprehended deviations from the roadmap agreed by stakeholders, did CoA convey third-party interference in running football in India to the world and Asian bodies? Also, Tuesday’s letter shows FIFA has either not taken cognizance of the CoA’s letter on August 6 or does not agree with the assurances given in its reply to Samoura and Windsor John, the AFC general secretary.

Among CoA’s arguments have been that 98% of the objections to the constitution have been addressed. State associations, or 35 of AIFF’s 36 affiliates, contest that saying not even 15% of the points they raised were. Even if CoA is right, India stands suspended. Because the crucial 2% includes the constitution not being in accordance with FIFA and AFC statutes; not being approved by AIFF’s general body without interference from any third party; only state representatives being allowed to vote.

CoA has told the Supreme Court that former players comprising 50% of the AIFF general body is in line with FIFA statutes. The court’s order on August 5 states that as part of procedure for AIFF elections. The suspension letter is proof that the world body interprets its statutes differently from CoA. The suspension has also left former internationals at a dead end days after they thought they would be part of the election process.

On July 25, FIFA had written to Dhar saying 50% of the general body comprising players would undermine the importance of existing members. It had instead proposed 25% of the executive committee have former players who would be co-opted. It is not clear why CoA did not adhere to that before the August 5 order was passed.

Just as it is not clear why in June CoA had formed an advisory committee only for it to be scrapped in no time by FIFA. That could have been an early indication from FIFA about what CoA could or could not do.

Two of CoA’s three members have been involved in framing the constitution since 2017 when they were given eight weeks by the Supreme Court. Well, the constitution is still in the works. Had it not been, India would not have had to deal with such a tough deadline, make a last-gasp dash to get it ready.

As India grapples with that, its footballers – short on international games for club and country at the best of time– referees, match officials, match commissioners and coaches seeking badges face international isolation, its competitions derecognised and all infrastructure work that requires FIFA funds stalled.