PETALING JAYA: The Football Association of Malaysia’s (FAM) decision to challenge FIFA’s sanctions at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was not just a legal move, it was a political necessity.
However, escaping punishment will remain difficult given what has already been admitted, says sports lawyer Etienne Rizk.
Rizk, who has extensive experience handling cases at CAS, said FIFA’s Appeal Committee’s decision clearly upheld sanctions on both FAM and the seven mixed-heritage players involved, including a 350,000 Swiss francs (RM1.8mil) fine imposed on the national body.
“The FIFA Appeal Committee decision have confirmed the sanctions on both FAM and the players,” said Rizk.
“FAM are appealing the FIFA Appeal Committee decision before CAS, but I do not know whether the players did too.”
He explained that if only FAM filed an appeal, CAS would have to reassess the case in its entirety, focusing primarily on whether FAM had committed wrongdoing in the players’ naturalisation process.
He added that FAM are likely to repeat and refine the legal arguments already raised at the FIFA level, while attempting to demonstrate that there was no organised wrongdoing within their administration, a strategy that could reduce or lift the financial sanction.
Rizk stressed that appealing was unavoidable for FAM, whatever the legal merits of the case.
“FAM had no option, on a political level, but to appeal FIFA’s decision,” said the Frenchman.
On FAM’s chances at CAS, Rizk cautioned that outcomes are difficult to predict without reviewing the full evidentiary record, but noted that FIFA’s appeal decision was ‘fully motivated’, suggesting the governing body had thoroughly justified their findings.
He identified several weaknesses in FAM’s position, including the players’ limited involvement in the naturalisation process, contradictory statements given during proceedings, and, most critically, admissions from within FAM themselves.
“One of the main issues is the FAM secretary-general acknowledging that members of the FAM administration engaged in handling and formatting certain copies of birth certificates, including altered content,” Rizk said.
“In that sense, considering the facts of the case and what has already been admitted by FAM, it seems hard, from an external observer’s point of view, for FAM to fully avoid sanctions.”
Despite this, Rizk believes the appeal still serves an important institutional purpose.
“In my opinion, FAM should defend themselves as an institution,” said Rizk.
“This proceeding is a way to act responsibly and to show that if any wrongdoing was committed, FAM reacted in a serious and mature way.”
