The case involves a dispute between the South African Football Association (SAFA) and FIFA, along with several other African football federations, regarding FIFA's decision to order a replay of a match during the 2018 World Cup qualifiers. The match in question, played between South Africa and Senegal on November 12, 2016, ended with a 2-1 victory for South Africa. However, it was later discovered that the referee, Joseph Odartei Lamptey, had manipulated the match by awarding a penalty for a nonexistent handball. Investigations by betting monitoring companies confirmed irregular betting patterns, leading FIFA to impose a lifetime ban on Lamptey. As a result, FIFA's Bureau for the World Cup Qualifiers annulled the original result and ordered a replay, which took place on November 10, 2017, with Senegal winning 2-0. This outcome secured Senegal's qualification for the 2018 World Cup, while South Africa's chances were significantly diminished.
SAFA contested FIFA's decision, arguing that the replay was unjust and violated procedural fairness. They claimed the decision was premature, as it was based on the operative part of a CAS award before the full reasoning was available, and that their right to be heard was violated since they were not involved in the disciplinary proceedings against the referee. SAFA also argued that the replay unfairly advantaged Senegal and disrupted the competitive dynamics of the qualifying group. They sought the annulment of the replayed match result, reinstatement of the original outcome, and reimbursement of legal costs by FIFA. The Fédération Burkinabé de Football also challenged the replay decision, but their arguments were similarly dismissed.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was tasked with resolving the dispute. The panel, composed of Prof. Martin Schimke, Mr. Hendrik Willem Kesler, and Mr. Jean-Philippe Rochat, examined the jurisdictional and substantive issues. FIFA argued that CAS lacked jurisdiction, citing Article 3, paragraph 3 of the FIFA World Cup Regulations, which states that decisions by the Organizing Committee are "final and binding and not subject to appeal." The panel agreed, concluding that the provision explicitly barred formal appeals to CAS. They emphasized that FIFA's regulations are designed to ensure the smooth organization of the World Cup, and allowing appeals against every decision could disrupt the competition. The panel also noted that the decision to replay the match was reasonable and within FIFA's authority, as it aimed to correct a sporting injustice caused by referee manipulation.
The panel rejected SAFA's argument that Article 3, paragraph 3 of the WC Regulations was incompatible with FIFA's statutes, clarifying that FIFA's general statutes do not govern World Cup-specific matters, which are instead addressed by specialized regulations. They also dismissed the claim that the replay decision fell under the FIFA Disciplinary Code, as it was not a disciplinary measure but a corrective action to maintain the competition's integrity. The panel ultimately declined jurisdiction over the appeal, affirming that FIFA's decision was final and binding under the WC Regulations. The ruling underscored the importance of maintaining the integrity of competitions while respecting the regulatory framework established by FIFA. The decision reinforced the principle that specialized regulations take precedence over general statutes in matters pertaining to specific events like the World Cup. The case highlights the complexities of sports arbitration and the balance between correcting sporting injustices and respecting procedural rules.