Inside SDT’s ruling that sent shockwaves in local football circles

The Sports Disputes Tribunal (SDT) on Tuesday evening delivered a ruling cancelling the Football Kenya Federation (FKF) elections for the second time in three months.

In his ruling, SDT chairman John Ohaga found that FKF’s Electoral Code locked out potential candidates. The contentious issue all along has been the “eligibility criteria” especially Section Four of 2020 FKF Electoral Code 2020 which sets a number of conditions candidates should meet.

Candidates for FKF presidency and vice-presidency must meet the following requirements:

“Each candidate shall present declarations of support from at least five (5) of the seventy-eight (78) eligible voters as per Art. 21 of the 2012 FKF Constitution. No candidate shall present an endorsement from a club/member that has endorsed another candidate. Such an endorsement shall be deemed null and void. In the event of a dispute pertaining to double endorsements, the FKF General Secretary, being the custodian of clubs and members’ registry, shall advise the board on which endorsement is valid,” sub-section three of the eligibility criteria reads in part.

“Being proposed as a candidate by a member shall be understood as a declaration of support. Each member may only present a declaration of support for one candidate for each of positions of President and Vice-President, such a declaration shall have been signed by the Chairperson and the Secretary of the branch, and by the chairman for a club. If a member presents more than one declaration of support for any of these two positions, none of its declarations shall be deemed valid,” sub-section five reads.

It is important to note that, this time, it is FKF that took the Sports Registrar to the Sports Disputes Tribunal, arguing that it was difficult to comply fully with the Sports Act. FKF officials were requesting to be allowed to proceed with the elections as they progressively (in stages) meet the requirements outlined in the Sports Act which include having representation in every county.

Sixty-four other interested parties requested to be enjoined in the case and Ohaga’s ruling, which was delivered via a video link, sent shockwaves in the FKF hierarchy.

“The eligibility criteria at Section 4 of the 2020 Electoral Code are unreasonable and are designed to lock out potential aspirants and are therefore a gross violation of the principle of free and fair elections contemplated by section 46 (6) as read with paragraph (d) of the second schedule to the Sports Act and Article 81 of the Constitution of Kenya,” the ruling read in part.

“… request that Fifa appoints a normalisation committee for the purpose of, inter alia, holding elections of the FKF.”

FKF president Nick Mwendwa called an impromptu press briefing on Tuesday night after the ruling and expressed his dissatisfaction with it but insisted he would follow Fifa’s directive.

“They (Sports Disputes Tribunal) cannot tell Fifa what to do. They said they would write to Fifa and we (FKF) will also wait for directions from Fifa. In the meantime, football has not stopped – I am still working according to the constitution of the federation and the staff at Goal Project will continue doing their work,” he said.

“This old mentality of disrupting things that are working well has to be stopped. We could be forced to repeat elections for the next five years because the tribunal has once again proved they don’t have the interests of football at heart,” a visibly-angry Mwendwa added.

The ruling was a win for former FKF President Sam Nyamweya, who is working hard behind the scenes to unseat the incumbent but was all but locked out of the election process by the electoral code.

While Fifa is yet to comment on the development, the world football governing body is very clear on government interference and is understandably eager to get done with the matter of FKF elections. A normalisation committee to oversee free and fair polls as recommended by the SDT could most likely be their most preferred route.

In 2004, Fifa set up a normalisation committee under the chairmanship of Kipchoge Keino to work with the help and under the supervision of Fifa with the aim of resolving an impulse of the same magnitude that FKF finds itself in currently. Part of the mandate was to set the groundwork for “… a transparent, simplified voting procedure that must be acceptable to all parties …”

Two years later, FKF, then known as the Kenya Football Federation (FKF), was banned by FIFA.

“Having determined that the agreements signed by the KFF in order to resolve the situation of Kenyan football have not been respected or only marginally implemented, and that fundamental principles such as the respect of sporting rules, the integrity of competitions, and Fifa’s statutes, regulations and decisions have been regularly violated or ignored by members of the Kenyan football family,” read a statement by Fifa dated October 25, 2006.

“The suspension, officially notified today via a letter to the KFF, will be in force until the agreements reached during the period of the KFF Normalisation Committee in 2004 as well as the 28 points agreed upon in a meeting in Cairo in January 2006 are considered as having been fully implemented,” it added.

Fifa earlier this year set up a normalisation committee to find a solution to the five-year-long football issues in Pakistan with the core mandate to hold fresh elections. Fifa did the same with the Ghanaian Football Association late last year, and Kenya could be headed in that direction.