The case involves an appeal by Club Olympique de Bamako and other Malian football clubs and regional leagues against the decision of the Fédération Malienne de Football (FEMAFOOT) regarding the composition of ad hoc electoral commissions. The appeal was brought before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which issued its ruling on May 31, 2021, with the operative part dated January 18, 2021. The appellants challenged FEMAFOOT's executive committee decision of October 21, 2020, which established the composition of ad hoc electoral commissions for first instance and appeal levels, arguing that the members did not meet the independence criteria set by FEMAFOOT's statutes. The CAS upheld the principle that members of ad hoc electoral commissions must adhere to the same independence standards as those for permanent electoral commissions, as stipulated in FEMAFOOT's statutes, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process. However, the CAS declined jurisdiction over a claim for damages filed by the appellants, ruling that such a claim could not be based on the arbitral tribunal's own decision in the same appeal.
The background of the case reveals a prolonged governance crisis within FEMAFOOT, dating back to 2015, with previous CAS rulings addressing organizational irregularities. In 2017, FIFA appointed a Normalization Committee (CONOR) to manage FEMAFOOT's affairs, revise statutes, and oversee elections. Following the adoption of new statutes in 2019, FEMAFOOT's executive committee extended the mandates of existing ad hoc commissions until permanent bodies could be elected. The appellants contested this, arguing it violated statutory independence requirements. The CAS's decision reinforces the importance of independent electoral oversight in sports governance while clarifying the limits of its jurisdiction in appeals involving damages claims tied to its own rulings.
The dispute also involved procedural irregularities, such as FEMAFOOT's unilateral appointment of electoral commissions and failure to address appeals transparently. The appellants sought provisional measures to suspend a general assembly scheduled for December 27, 2020, pending CAS rulings. On December 23, 2020, the CAS partially granted this request, suspending the assembly until a final decision was rendered. During subsequent hearings, the parties debated issues like the joinder of appeals and the validity of certain appellants' authority to act. FEMAFOOT eventually withdrew its objection regarding the representatives' authority, and the parties reached a partial agreement on procedural matters.
The appellants argued that FEMAFOOT violated its statutes by appointing ad hoc electoral commissions instead of independent commissions, as required under Article 86. They highlighted that the secretary-general and administrative staff, who were paid employees, were improperly designated to these roles, creating a conflict of interest. FEMAFOOT defended its actions, stating the ad hoc commissions were necessary due to the absence of statutorily elected commissions and were intended to ensure continuity until proper elections could be held. The CAS panel concluded that the Executive Committee could appoint ad hoc commissions under Article 73 to resolve the transitional issue but emphasized that these commissions must adhere to independence requirements. The panel found the appointed members lacked independence, invalidating all decisions made by them and requiring FEMAFOOT to restart the election process with independent oversight.
The CAS also addressed FEMAFOOT's claim for compensation related to the postponed general assembly, rejecting it on the grounds that the appellants were justified in challenging the legitimacy of the ad hoc commissions. The ruling underscored the necessity of adhering to statutory independence requirements to maintain the integrity of electoral procedures. Ultimately, the CAS declared FEMAFOOT's October 21, 2020 decision null and void, referring the matter back to FEMAFOOT for compliance with statutory provisions. The case highlights the ongoing challenges in ensuring transparent and fair electoral processes within football federations and the critical role of independent oversight in sports governance.