The case revolves around Constant Omari, President of the Congolese Football Federation (FECOFA), First Vice-President of the African Football Confederation (CAF), and a member of FIFA's Council, who sought re-election to the FIFA Council. His candidacy was challenged when FIFA's Ethics Committee Investigatory Chamber initiated a preliminary investigation into his conduct. The investigation focused on allegations related to an amendment to a licensing contract with Lagardère Sport, which was suspected of benefiting Omari and Lagardère at CAF's expense, potentially causing financial harm estimated at USD 6.7 million. The probe examined possible violations of FIFA's Code of Ethics, including general conduct rules, duty of loyalty, acceptance of gifts, commissions, abuse of power, and misappropriation of funds.
FIFA's Governance Committee, responsible for vetting candidates for FIFA Council positions, reviewed Omari's eligibility and considered the ongoing ethics investigation. The committee concluded that Omari did not meet FIFA's stringent integrity requirements, leading to his disqualification from the election. Omari challenged this decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing procedural flaws and insufficient evidence. The CAS upheld FIFA's decision, ruling that the Governance Committee's role extends beyond merely assessing whether a candidate has been formally convicted of misconduct. It emphasized the need for exemplary conduct from candidates seeking high-ranking FIFA positions. The tribunal found that the committee acted within its administrative authority, relying on credible evidence from the preliminary investigation, which indicated prima facie violations of FIFA's ethical standards. The CAS also dismissed Omari's procedural objections, noting that he had been given ample opportunity to respond to the allegations.
Omari's appeal argued that the decision was unjust, disproportionate, and violated principles of fairness and due process. He claimed he was unaware of the contract amendments until April 2019 and resigned upon learning of them. He also emphasized that he had not faced any criminal or sporting sanctions and was denied the right to be heard. FIFA defended its decision, asserting that the eligibility criteria required candidates to demonstrate impeccable integrity. The Control Committee's decision was based on preliminary investigations that revealed sufficient evidence to question Omari's integrity, including his involvement in contract modifications that shifted financial risks to CAF and his acceptance of luxury accommodations and services from Lagardère.
The CAS examined its jurisdiction under Swiss law and its procedural rules, confirming its competence to adjudicate the dispute. The arbitrator concluded that the FIFA Control Committee had broad discretion to evaluate Omari's conduct based on preliminary investigations, which indicated potential violations of FIFA's ethical codes. Despite Omari's claims of ignorance regarding the controversial contract, evidence showed he was copied on relevant communications and benefited from lavish expenses covered by Lagardère, suggesting his awareness of the negotiations. The arbitrator found no procedural flaws in the investigation and dismissed Omari's arguments about proportionality and presumption of innocence, noting the administrative nature of the eligibility review.
Ultimately, the CAS upheld FIFA's decision, ruling that Omari's conduct did not meet the required standards of integrity and transparency for his desired position. The appeal was dismissed, and FIFA's original decision was confirmed. The case highlights the stringent ethical expectations placed on high-ranking football officials and the deference given to FIFA's internal decision-making processes in such matters. The ruling reinforces the principle that candidates for FIFA leadership must demonstrate impeccable integrity to uphold public trust in the sport's governance.