The case involves a dispute between eleven Iraqi football stakeholders and the Iraq Football Association (IFA) regarding the validity of the IFA Executive Committee elections held on 31 May 2018. The appellants, including former professional footballers and club officials, challenged the election results, citing irregularities and procedural flaws. They argued that the IFA's refusal to consider their appeal violated the principle of estoppel, as they relied on a letter from the IFA Secretary General suggesting appeals were permitted. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), led by Sole Arbitrator Prof. Philippe Sands QC, examined whether the IFA was estopped from denying the appellants the right to appeal. The panel concluded that the IFA's representation created a legitimate expectation, and the appellants had acted in good faith. The CAS also found serious breaches of the IFA Statutes and Electoral Code, which undermined the election's fairness and integrity, rendering it invalid.
The appellants, including notable figures like Adnan Darjal, a former national team captain, alleged that the election process was marred by irregularities, including undue influence and procedural violations. The IFA dismissed these claims, arguing that the letter permitting appeals was fake. The CAS rejected this argument, emphasizing the Secretary General's authority under the IFA Statutes. The dispute centered on conflicting interpretations of the IFA's Electoral Code, with the appellants presenting a 44-article version and the IFA relying on a 27-article version. The CAS noted the lack of clarity in the regulatory framework and the importance of procedural fairness.
The appellants filed their appeal with the CAS on 10 July 2018, contesting the IFA's decision in a 24 June letter that dismissed their internal appeal. The IFA argued that the CAS lacked jurisdiction, as the appellants failed to exhaust internal remedies and the appeal was time-barred. The CAS determined that the 24 June letter constituted a challengeable decision and that the appellants had no alternative legal remedies, fulfilling the requirements for CAS jurisdiction. The Sole Arbitrator found that nine appellants had standing to bring the appeal, while two did not, as they were not directly aggrieved by the IFA's decision.
Key testimony from Mr. Hassoon, a former member of the Electoral Committee (EC), revealed significant irregularities, including the EC's late formation, unqualified members, and interference by IFA officials. The Sole Arbitrator concluded that the election violated the IFA Statutes and Electoral Code, particularly the requirement to establish the EC six months before the election. The exclusion of Dr. Al-Tameemi's candidacy for the mandatory female quota on the Executive Committee further highlighted procedural flaws. The CAS declared the 2018 election invalid and ordered the IFA to organize a new election in compliance with its statutes and regulations.
The decision underscored the importance of transparency and adherence to electoral rules in sports governance. The CAS emphasized that substantive violations of electoral rules could not be overlooked, even if procedural steps were followed. The ruling set a precedent for future cases involving electoral disputes in sports governance, reinforcing the protection of legitimate expectations and the consequences of substantive breaches. The case also highlighted the challenges of resolving disputes within sports arbitration, where legal and procedural issues often intersect with broader organizational dynamics. The CAS's decision aimed to restore integrity and fairness to the IFA's electoral process.