The case involves Kwesi Nyantakyi, a former high-ranking football official and President of the Ghana Football Association (GFA), appealing a lifetime ban and fine imposed by FIFA for violations of the FIFA Code of Ethics, including bribery, conflict of interest, and corruption. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed the case de novo, examining both substantive and procedural aspects. The legal principles applied included tempus regit actum, which dictates that offenses are judged based on the rules in force at the time of the alleged misconduct, and lex mitior, allowing for the application of more lenient laws if they come into effect later. The burden of proof rested on Nyantakyi to demonstrate that the sanctions were disproportionate, in line with Swiss Civil Code principles.
The case stemmed from an undercover investigation by journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas, which exposed Nyantakyi’s involvement in a fabricated bribery scheme. Recorded meetings showed Nyantakyi accepting cash payments and facilitating discussions for sponsorship deals and infrastructure contracts in Ghana, though the scheme had no real possibility of materializing. FIFA’s Ethics Committee found Nyantakyi guilty, imposing a lifetime ban and a CHF 500,000 fine. Nyantakyi appealed, arguing the sanctions were disproportionate compared to penalties given to other officials, such as Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini, who received shorter bans for financial misconduct.
The CAS panel acknowledged the seriousness of Nyantakyi’s offenses, which undermined football’s integrity, but considered mitigating factors, including the fabricated nature of the scheme, his previously unblemished record, and his long service to football. The panel rejected FIFA’s comparison to match-fixing cases, noting Nyantakyi’s actions did not involve influencing match outcomes. While upholding the gravity of his misconduct, the panel found the lifetime ban excessive, reducing it to 15 years. The fine was also reduced to CHF 100,000, reflecting the USD 65,000 Nyantakyi received and ensuring deterrence without being punitive.
The decision underscores the importance of proportionality in disciplinary sanctions, balancing punitive measures with contextual factors. It highlights CAS’s role in independently reviewing FIFA’s decisions while respecting its discretionary authority. The ruling reaffirms the zero-tolerance stance on corruption in football but emphasizes that sanctions must align with the specific circumstances of each case. Nyantakyi’s reduced sanctions reflect a tailored approach, ensuring accountability while considering mitigating factors. The case serves as a reminder of the ethical standards expected in football governance and the consequences of their breach.