By Anthony Atata
In a Five question interview to the press, Anthony Atata said that the decision of the appeal committee was proper and in line with applicable rules.
1.What are your thoughts on the ruling of CAF’s Appeal board on the Morocco v Senegal AFCON finals that stripped Senegal of the Trophy?
1. I think the decision of CAF appeal board is in line with the applicable provisions of CAF regulations. I understand how emotional this can be for a lot of us who are fans of the Lions of Teranga but the decision is in line with Chapter 35 Article 82 and 84 of the AFCON Regulations. The decision is also supported by Article 148 and 105 of the CAF Disciplinary Code. The only thing I think should have been done better was that the decision would have been taken earlier than it did but that doesn’t mean that the ruling will be vitiated. If we look at the whole scenario holistically, there may not be a delay because the matter had gone through the Disciplinary board first where imposition of fines on both parties was ordered before it went up for appeal where the forfeiture was ordered by the appeal board.
2. People have argued that since the referee allowed the match to continue after Senegal staged a walk out and returned and Morocco continuing the match should have estopped Moroco from protesting.
The referee continuing with the match does not regularise the irregularity. The offence committed by Senegal in the course of the match cannot be cured because they returned or the referee continued the match. The offence is consumated as soon as you walk away from the match. On the issue of Morocco participating in the match thereafter, that was the right thing to do. You wouldn’t expect them to refuse participation when the referee had already called that the game should continue. If they did that, they would have also be in breach of the relevant provisions they would rely on to push their case. It was proper for them to participate and thereafter file their protest. I can’t find a time limit to file such application in the CAF regulations but under the FIFA Disciplinary Code, it must be within 24hours of the end of the match in question. This means that the match must end officially before you bring your protest. Morocco complied with that before bringing their protest.
3. Some have argued that the Laws of the Game makes the referee’s decision final so since he continued the game,that decision should have been deemed final.
I think this is where there is misconception about what the issue is. The issue here is not related to the laws of the game. We really need to understand the scope of what amounts to the laws of the Game. Laws of the game do not regulate offences like walking out on a match. Laws of the game are purely rules of football. Things like what amounts to a goal, a penalty shoot out, a free kick, red card offence, yellow card offence, off side, dimension of pitches, goal keeping etc. Those are the rules that define what a football competition is.
Law 5 particularly sub 2 which everyone seems to be talking about states thus
” The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including
whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. The
decisions of the referee, and all other match officials, must always be respected.”
The finality of the referee’s decision is only connected to the laws of the game and the scope of his powers to punish are also defined clearly in the laws of the game.
The nature of what happened in the AFCON finals wasn’t exactly connected to play. It wasn’t the kind of Disciplinary decision exclusively within the powers of the referee. Only offences connected to play are exclusively within his powers.
Article 6 of the CAF Disciplinary Code ( CDC)states:
1. During matches, disciplinary decisions are taken by the referee.
2. These decisions are final.
3. The jurisdiction of the judicial bodies may apply (cf. art. 11).
Article 11 (CDC)provides that:
The Disciplinary Board is responsible for:
• sanctioning infringements which may or may not have escaped the match officials’
attention;
• sanctioning all offences which occur prior to, during, or after a fixture;
• rectifying obvious errors in disciplinary decisions based on referees’ reports;
• extending the duration of suspensions incurred automatically by an expulsion;
• pronouncing additional sanctions to those imposed by the referee, such as a fine.
Sanctions may be taken after viewing a recording of the match.
It is important to also note that the appeal board wouldn’t have sat over the appeal if the fact in issue was connected to the Laws of the Game. They were able to sit on the appeal because the issue was not about Laws of the Game.
Article 56 of (CDC) provides that:
1. The appellant may contest any decision of fact with the exception of the Laws of the Game as applied by the referee.
Even the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) will not allow any appeal if it borders on the Laws of the Game. This is provided for in Article 63 of the CDC and 48(4) of the CAF Statute.
ARTICLE 45 of CAF Statute states that:
1. In case of violation of CAF Statutes & Regulations and the decisions of the competent bodies, or in the case of non-sporting or indecent conduct, disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against National Associations, clubs, officials, and players; in accordance with the provisions set forth in the current Statutes, in the marketing and competitions regulations as well as in CAF Disciplinary Code and CAF Code of Ethics.
2. CAF may impose the following disciplinary measures:
– 2.1. Against natural persons and legal entities:
a) Warning;
b) Reprimand;
c) Fine;
d) Return of prizes;
e) Suspension
– 2.2. Against natural persons:
a) Caution;
b) Expulsion;
c) Match suspension;
d) Ban from the dressing rooms and/or the substitutes’ bench;
e) Ban from entering a stadium;
f) Ban on taking part in any football-related activity;
g) Fine.
– 2.3. Against legal entities:
a) Ban on registering new players in CAF competitions;
b) Obligation to play a match behind closed doors;
c) Obligation to play a match on neutral territory;
d) Ban on playing in a particular stadium;
e) Annulment of the result of a match;
f) Expulsion;
g) Awarding of a match by default;
h) Deduction of points;
i) Relegation to a lower division;
j) Fine;
k) Suspension.
3. These sanctions are to be imposed by the Disciplinary and Appeal Boards,
The referee’s decision to continue that Match was in error and that error was within the powers of the Disciplinary board to adjudicate and consequently within the powers of the appeal board. It didn’t border on the Laws of the Game as provided for by the IFAB Laws of the Game 2025/26
4. What should we expect from Court of Arbitration ( CAS) – Like I said, since the issue does not border on Laws of the Game, CAS will assume Jurisdiction . Like I said also, the decision of the appeal board is supported by the applicable regulations. The hope for Senegal will be on the fact that Morocco also was involved in a lot of infractions during that match. The referees report documented it. The quantum of that infraction may turn the case in favour of Senegal.
5. What will be the effect if CAS upholds the decision of CAF’s appeal board?
Article 92 of CDC provides that:
1. The person required to return an award shall return all of the benefits received, in
particular sums of money and symbolic objects (medal, trophy etc.).
2. The money received shall always be returned in full. The legal body pronouncing the sanction decides any interest that may be due as it sees fit.
Sadly, that will apply to Senegal.
Anthony Atata, a top sports Lawyer has given his opinion on the raging controversy surrounding the decision of the Appeal committee of the Confederation of African Football ( CAF) stripping Senegal of the AFCON title.
