The case involves a complex dispute between AS Vita Club, the Congolese Football Federation (FECOFA), and Cercle Sportif Don Bosco, centered on the eligibility and registration of a player, Matutala Zao. The controversy arose when allegations surfaced that the player had been registered under multiple identities, leading to accusations of double affiliation and falsified documents. The dispute was brought before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which examined jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive issues.
The core of the dispute revolved around whether AS Vita Club knowingly registered an ineligible player. Don Bosco claimed the player had previously been registered with another club, FC Corbeaux KFA, under a different identity, and accused Vita Club of fielding him improperly. FECOFA initially confirmed the player’s eligibility but later acknowledged administrative errors, attributing the discrepancies to fraud by the player and his former club, Académie de Tshangu. Despite this, FECOFA’s ad hoc commission imposed sanctions on Vita Club, including match forfeitures and suspensions of club officials.
Vita Club appealed to the CAS, arguing it had acted in good faith, relying on FECOFA’s initial confirmation of the player’s eligibility. The club contended it could not have detected the fraud, as the player’s documentation appeared legitimate. The CAS arbitrator found no evidence of bad faith by Vita Club, emphasizing that the club had followed proper procedures and was misled by FECOFA’s administrative failures. The arbitrator also noted inconsistencies in the player’s licenses and passports, which suggested fraudulent activity but did not implicate Vita Club.
The CAS ruled that sanctions under FECOFA’s regulations, such as Article 246 of the RGS, were inapplicable to Vita Club, as the club had not made false declarations or acted negligently. The arbitrator annulled the sanctions against Vita Club, including the match forfeitures and suspensions, but dismissed claims for damages related to the loss of the championship title, as these fell outside the appeal’s scope. The decision underscored the importance of good faith in player registrations and the need for clear regulatory standards to address administrative errors.
Ultimately, the CAS partially upheld Vita Club’s appeal, overturning the sanctions while affirming the club’s reliance on FECOFA’s flawed administrative processes. The case highlights the challenges of player eligibility disputes and the critical role of procedural fairness in sports governance. The ruling serves as a reminder of the need for robust verification mechanisms to prevent fraud and ensure accountability in football administration.