Time for new leadership in FIFA and CAF
- Details
- Category: Sports
- Written by ODEGBAMI ON SATURDAY
- Hits: 764
I can’t pretend that I know much about the subject of the politics of FIFA and CAF. In the first 30 years of my life covering all of my actual playing career, all I knew are my interactions with the game as a young man playing association football in different competitions organised by both bodies, if that can count as knowledge of FIFA and CAF politics.
Beyond playing the game there is also, of course, my limited knowledge as a member of the Nigeria Football Association during a period when the NFA’s interaction with both bodies was little known to other members of the NFA board except the Chairman and the Secretary-General. Our domestic football organisation and administration had little or nothing to do with CAF or FIFA. We, the members of the Board, as well as members of the General Assembly, had nothing to discuss or to do directly with FIFA and CAF. Understandably, at that time, Nigeria never had any threat of sanctions from either of the bodies over any matters outside of those that infringed on the technical aspect of the game. I can recall the matters of discrepancy in the declared ages of some players during competitions when age-group championships were introduced. Nigeria was penalised twice for the offences with suspensions. Other than those incidents FIFA and CAF were two distant organisations minding their business whilst we were minding ours domestically.Even when I became a member of the CAF Players and, later, Football Committees, the appointments merely gave me the opportunity for closer association with a few members of the CAF Executive Committee that were around at the various times of our meetings, and nothing more about how CAF itself functions. I must emphasise that even at that limited committee level my role and activities in four, 2-year tenures have not had any connection to or impact on any aspect of football in the continent or in Nigeria. This is just to buttress my point that I truly know so little about the internal mechanisms of CAF outside of the little that I read about from time to time. What I do know for sure is that CAF and FIFA are remote guardians of the Laws of the Game and the independence of themselves and their members. In those days, in late Chief Oyo Orok Oyo I thought Nigeria had the quintessential football administrator who was in both FIFA and CAF, and effectively shielded the country from any harm, controversies, and scandals. Through the years of his stay in both bodies he was an epitome of dignity, respectability and integrity! Those Nigerians that were later invited to committees in those bodies got there on the strength of their recognised service, on merit and on Chief Oyo’s recommendation. That was how late Patrick Okpomo got into active roles in CAF and FIFA committees. Others came after him: Chief Festus Onigbinde Adegboyega, Mr. Linus Mba, Alhaji Yusuf Alli, Dr. Samson Emeka Omeruah, and, so on. My knowledge of both bodies was, therefore, very limited.
But let me go back to the issue of CAF and FIFA
With FIFA and CAF intervening more in the matters of domestic football around the world, and particularly in Africa, greater attention and questions are been raised about how things work within it. The recent vote-for-cash scandal has drawn greater attention to the activities of FIFA’s Executive Committee members, and has left the world asking questions that are begging for answers. Why for example has it taken FIFA all these years to recognise the power of football to drive global causes that make the world a better place to live? At the last World Cup Sepp Blatter surprisingly embraced the idea of using football to drive education for the 80 million out-of-school children around the world. For years I have been wondering when the FIFA leadership would take the role of football even further by joining with the United Nations to use football as a tool for job creation for the youths in the burgeoning football industry; as a tool (through the hosting of the World Cup for example) of rapid infrastructural development of needy countries rather than an event that enriches the already rich countries? Football can also be used to develop parts of the world rather than for FIFA’s profit only! Even the United Nations recognises now that sport can be a great weapon in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal project target to eradicate illiteracy, poverty and disease. Why not FIFA? And demonstrably too? I have also wondered when FIFA would take the issue of ‘slavery in African football’ seriously enough for major decisions and changes to be introduced into the game’s administration so that the practice may be halted. I have wondered when FIFA would realise that its ‘non-interference by third parties’ clause in the affairs of its members is more detrimental than beneficial to third world countries and needs a review to stem the tide of corruption and avoidable conflicts in administration in that part of the world.
In the course of the past 50 years, there have been only three Presidents of FIFA. Sir Stanley Rous headed the body for 13 years, from 1961 to 1974; Joao Havelange ruled for 24 years, from 1974 to 1998; and the present President, Mr Sepp Blatter, has been on the ‘throne’ for the past 12 years, and we are still counting.
I now believe that the game’s leaders remain in office for too long. A cursory look through the history of the organisation tells a story that reflects everything but true democratic practise. A global organisation such as FIFA should not have sit-tight leaders. It is a body that must set standards of transparency, justice, fair-play, ethical behaviour, and integrity. For a body that enjoys absolute monopoly and maximum control, to concentrate power in the hands of one person is bad enough, to now perpetuate such a person in office is recipe for disaster! The product would be what the whole world denounces in politics as maximum rulership. No human organisation thrives in an environment of authoritarianism and dictatorship. Yet, this is what the present succession process in FIFA and CAF has enshrined as a way of life. That’s why Issa Hayatou, the CAF President has remained in office and in power for 22 years.
I ask myself: Why is the most powerful democracy in the world the one that provides a terminal arrangement for its leaders? The power of America derives from its constitution that does not permit a perpetuation of leadership in power and limits its Presidents to a maximum of two terms of 4 years each only, just so that they do not stay for too long in power and get drunk like so many maximum rulers in several parts of the world that have decimated their people through the arrogant use of excessive power! Who does not know that ‘power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’? FIFA cannot survive any serious scrutiny of its activities, its finances, and its adherence to democratic processes and practise. It is a good thing to reinforce its independence from the influence of any external bodies and governments but not at the cost of perpetuating its leadership. World football does not require a dictator to lead it. Football is the people’s game and the choices and decisions of the people must be reflected through all its activities. Recent developments around the bid for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups have thrown up issues that even FIFA will not be able to bury under the carpet. More questions will be asked about the succession and election processes in FIFA. The Statutes will surely come under scrutiny or review very soon. If none of these happens in the next few years I see a splinter group emerging to challenge the monopoly of FIFA. And that would mark the beginning of the end of what we now know as FIFA! Mark my words.
As a global body I advocate that there must be a limited tenure for its leadership. FIFA and CAF should go in that direction.
Otherwise, both bodies will be silently breeding opposition that may destroy it one day soon. The absolute powers of the leaderships have sustained simply and only because the countries that can change things have been silenced by the compromising attitudes of the members representing them. They are so well ‘taken care of ‘ that they never think of changing the system.
We have seen through history the ‘legacies’ of dictatorships around the world: corruption, oppression, subjugation, nepotism, profligacy, power-drunkenness, arrogance, incompetence, greed, secrecy, and so on. If that is the case and the world knows it why does it allow its most important institutions to practise authoritarianism? Why does the world allow the world’s most important single sport to be run like a private fiefdom? Why does the world allow for the evolution of maximum rulers in football? Where are the checks and balances over a maximum ruler?
The tenure of all Associations, Federations, Confederations and even FIFA should be limited to a maximum of two terms of 4 years each. 8 years is more than enough time for any leader to make their mark and pass on the baton. It is the wisdom in this that makes America the country that it is. There can never be a dictatorship in American government. The system ensures that it provides not just checks and balances but also limits the amount of damage any bad leader can do to the country. Through its constitution it provides the people with the tools to change their leaders. Even where they are considered great leaders, the system still does not permit their stay beyond the 4 year-period. FIFA and CAF, in particular, must go in that direction. The challenge now is who to lead the way towards this much needed reform for it is the one sure way to halt dictatorship and minimise corruption.
Our papers
Time for new leadership in FIFA and CAF
Category: Sports Written by ODEGBAMI ON SATURDAY Hits: 764
I can’t pretend that I know much about the subject of the politics of FIFA and CAF. In the first 30 years of my life covering all of my actual playing career, all I knew are my interactions with the game as a young man playing association football in different competitions organised by both bodies, if that can count as knowledge of FIFA and CAF politics.
Beyond playing the game there is also, of course, my limited knowledge as a member of the Nigeria Football Association during a period when the NFA’s interaction with both bodies was little known to other members of the NFA board except the Chairman and the Secretary-General. Our domestic football organisation and administration had little or nothing to do with CAF or FIFA. We, the members of the Board, as well as members of the General Assembly, had nothing to discuss or to do directly with FIFA and CAF. Understandably, at that time, Nigeria never had any threat of sanctions from either of the bodies over any matters outside of those that infringed on the technical aspect of the game. I can recall the matters of discrepancy in the declared ages of some players during competitions when age-group championships were introduced. Nigeria was penalised twice for the offences with suspensions. Other than those incidents FIFA and CAF were two distant organisations minding their business whilst we were minding ours domestically.Even when I became a member of the CAF Players and, later, Football Committees, the appointments merely gave me the opportunity for closer association with a few members of the CAF Executive Committee that were around at the various times of our meetings, and nothing more about how CAF itself functions. I must emphasise that even at that limited committee level my role and activities in four, 2-year tenures have not had any connection to or impact on any aspect of football in the continent or in Nigeria. This is just to buttress my point that I truly know so little about the internal mechanisms of CAF outside of the little that I read about from time to time. What I do know for sure is that CAF and FIFA are remote guardians of the Laws of the Game and the independence of themselves and their members. In those days, in late Chief Oyo Orok Oyo I thought Nigeria had the quintessential football administrator who was in both FIFA and CAF, and effectively shielded the country from any harm, controversies, and scandals. Through the years of his stay in both bodies he was an epitome of dignity, respectability and integrity! Those Nigerians that were later invited to committees in those bodies got there on the strength of their recognised service, on merit and on Chief Oyo’s recommendation. That was how late Patrick Okpomo got into active roles in CAF and FIFA committees. Others came after him: Chief Festus Onigbinde Adegboyega, Mr. Linus Mba, Alhaji Yusuf Alli, Dr. Samson Emeka Omeruah, and, so on. My knowledge of both bodies was, therefore, very limited.
But let me go back to the issue of CAF and FIFA
With FIFA and CAF intervening more in the matters of domestic football around the world, and particularly in Africa, greater attention and questions are been raised about how things work within it. The recent vote-for-cash scandal has drawn greater attention to the activities of FIFA’s Executive Committee members, and has left the world asking questions that are begging for answers. Why for example has it taken FIFA all these years to recognise the power of football to drive global causes that make the world a better place to live? At the last World Cup Sepp Blatter surprisingly embraced the idea of using football to drive education for the 80 million out-of-school children around the world. For years I have been wondering when the FIFA leadership would take the role of football even further by joining with the United Nations to use football as a tool for job creation for the youths in the burgeoning football industry; as a tool (through the hosting of the World Cup for example) of rapid infrastructural development of needy countries rather than an event that enriches the already rich countries? Football can also be used to develop parts of the world rather than for FIFA’s profit only! Even the United Nations recognises now that sport can be a great weapon in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal project target to eradicate illiteracy, poverty and disease. Why not FIFA? And demonstrably too? I have also wondered when FIFA would take the issue of ‘slavery in African football’ seriously enough for major decisions and changes to be introduced into the game’s administration so that the practice may be halted. I have wondered when FIFA would realise that its ‘non-interference by third parties’ clause in the affairs of its members is more detrimental than beneficial to third world countries and needs a review to stem the tide of corruption and avoidable conflicts in administration in that part of the world.
In the course of the past 50 years, there have been only three Presidents of FIFA. Sir Stanley Rous headed the body for 13 years, from 1961 to 1974; Joao Havelange ruled for 24 years, from 1974 to 1998; and the present President, Mr Sepp Blatter, has been on the ‘throne’ for the past 12 years, and we are still counting.
I now believe that the game’s leaders remain in office for too long. A cursory look through the history of the organisation tells a story that reflects everything but true democratic practise. A global organisation such as FIFA should not have sit-tight leaders. It is a body that must set standards of transparency, justice, fair-play, ethical behaviour, and integrity. For a body that enjoys absolute monopoly and maximum control, to concentrate power in the hands of one person is bad enough, to now perpetuate such a person in office is recipe for disaster! The product would be what the whole world denounces in politics as maximum rulership. No human organisation thrives in an environment of authoritarianism and dictatorship. Yet, this is what the present succession process in FIFA and CAF has enshrined as a way of life. That’s why Issa Hayatou, the CAF President has remained in office and in power for 22 years.
I ask myself: Why is the most powerful democracy in the world the one that provides a terminal arrangement for its leaders? The power of America derives from its constitution that does not permit a perpetuation of leadership in power and limits its Presidents to a maximum of two terms of 4 years each only, just so that they do not stay for too long in power and get drunk like so many maximum rulers in several parts of the world that have decimated their people through the arrogant use of excessive power! Who does not know that ‘power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’? FIFA cannot survive any serious scrutiny of its activities, its finances, and its adherence to democratic processes and practise. It is a good thing to reinforce its independence from the influence of any external bodies and governments but not at the cost of perpetuating its leadership. World football does not require a dictator to lead it. Football is the people’s game and the choices and decisions of the people must be reflected through all its activities. Recent developments around the bid for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups have thrown up issues that even FIFA will not be able to bury under the carpet. More questions will be asked about the succession and election processes in FIFA. The Statutes will surely come under scrutiny or review very soon. If none of these happens in the next few years I see a splinter group emerging to challenge the monopoly of FIFA. And that would mark the beginning of the end of what we now know as FIFA! Mark my words.
As a global body I advocate that there must be a limited tenure for its leadership. FIFA and CAF should go in that direction.
Otherwise, both bodies will be silently breeding opposition that may destroy it one day soon. The absolute powers of the leaderships have sustained simply and only because the countries that can change things have been silenced by the compromising attitudes of the members representing them. They are so well ‘taken care of ‘ that they never think of changing the system.
We have seen through history the ‘legacies’ of dictatorships around the world: corruption, oppression, subjugation, nepotism, profligacy, power-drunkenness, arrogance, incompetence, greed, secrecy, and so on. If that is the case and the world knows it why does it allow its most important institutions to practise authoritarianism? Why does the world allow the world’s most important single sport to be run like a private fiefdom? Why does the world allow for the evolution of maximum rulers in football? Where are the checks and balances over a maximum ruler?
The tenure of all Associations, Federations, Confederations and even FIFA should be limited to a maximum of two terms of 4 years each. 8 years is more than enough time for any leader to make their mark and pass on the baton. It is the wisdom in this that makes America the country that it is. There can never be a dictatorship in American government. The system ensures that it provides not just checks and balances but also limits the amount of damage any bad leader can do to the country. Through its constitution it provides the people with the tools to change their leaders. Even where they are considered great leaders, the system still does not permit their stay beyond the 4 year-period. FIFA and CAF, in particular, must go in that direction. The challenge now is who to lead the way towards this much needed reform for it is the one sure way to halt dictatorship and minimise corruption.