Fighting Covid-19 like a true Warrior
SCORES of local clubs and officials might have lost tens of thousands of dollars, ripped off by a flawed domestic football judicial system, whose judicial rules and regulations are in gross violation of the FIFA and CAF Disciplinary Codes.
The amount which the clubs and officials have lost to a system that is supposed to protect them, can only be estimated but, with ZIFA revealing they paid $125 000 just to take their case to their Appeals Board, it could run into millions of dollars.
ZIFA have appealed against the decision by their disciplinary committee, to quash the provisional suspension of the association’s vice-president Gift Banda by his fellow board members, for allegedly bringing the game of football into disrepute.
The association’s spokesperson, Xolisani Gwesela, told our sister newspaper, The Sunday Mail, they had already paid $125 000 for the appeal to be heard.
The ZIFA Appeals Board have, over the years, head scores of cases involving clubs and individuals, who would not have been happy by the verdicts passed by both the association and the PSL disciplinary committees.
The judicial cases have involved clubs from across all levels of competitive football in the country — the Premiership to Division Two sides — while scores of officials involved in the game have also pursued justice in one form or the other.
Scores of the country’s football clubs have, over the years, taken a number of their cases to the ZIFA Appeals Body, where they have found relief, after contesting the decisions which would have been passed by either the PSL or lower league’s disciplinary committees.
A number of officials, including some of those who today occupy influential positions in the domestic football leadership, have also — at one point or another — taken their cases to the ZIFA Appeals Committee seeking relief after they were either banned or suspended.
In some cases, over the years, the appellants have even been ordered to pay additional costs to the appeal fees they would have paid to get their cases heard.
Even, after losing their cases, they could also have been reimbursed part of their expenses. However, they were not reimbursed. Investigations by The Herald have also revealed that many of these clubs, and officials, could have been ripped off tens of thousands of dollars by a flawed domestic football judicial system whose regulations are a gross violation of the FIFA and CAF Disciplinary Codes.
They should all have been reimbursed the money they paid for their cases to be heard, once they were given relief by the appeals committee, as per the provisions of both the CAF and FIFA statutes.
FIFA and CAF statutes are clear that, in the event an appeal is successful, the party which would have appealed should be reimbursed what they paid for their cases to be heard with the respondents paying the entire costs.
Even, if the appeal is unsuccessful, the appellant can also be paid a chunk of their appeal costs.
The FIFA Disciplinary Code says after a hearing, ‘‘costs and expenses shall be paid by the unsuccessful party, if there is no unsuccessful party, they shall be borne by FIFA, if considered fair to do so, they may be split among several parties.
‘‘Anyone wishing to lodge an appeal shall transfer an appeal fee of CHF 3,000 to FIFA’s bank account before expiry of the time limit for submitting the reasons for appeal.
‘‘This amount will be reimbursed to the appellant if he wins the case. Costs and expenses payable by an appellant, who loses the case, are deducted from this amount. Any remaining amount is reimbursed to him. If the deposit is insufficient, the appellant will be ordered to pay the difference.
‘‘If the appeal is considered to be improper, costs and expenses shall be paid in addition to the deposit.’’
The CAF Disciplinary Code also provides guidance, as to how such issues should be handled, saying ‘’anyone wishing to lodge an appeal shall a deposit the amount of three thousand USD dollars (US$3,000) to CAF’s bank account before expiry of the time limit of seven (7) days to formalise the appeal.
‘‘The deposit will be reimbursed to the appellant if he wins the case. CAF will retain the deposit if the appellant loses the case in law or in substance.
‘‘If the appeal is considered to be frivolous or vexatious, costs and expenses shall be paid in addition to the deposit, as determined by the Chairman.’’
Article 2 of the CAF Disciplinary Code, which deals with ‘‘scope of application,’’ confirms that associations fall under its jurisdiction.
‘‘The following are subject to this code — (a) national associations; (b) members of these associations, in particular the clubs; (c) officials; (d) players; (e) match officials; (f) anyone with an authorisation from CAF, in particular with regard to an official activity (as agent or other), match, competition or other event organised by CAF; (g) spectators.’’
It’s a replica of the FIFA statutes.
ZIFA, as the country’s ultimate football controlling body, provide the game with the rules and regulations under which the sport should be played.
All the leagues which fall under the jurisdiction of ZIFA, including the PSL, cannot come up with their set of rules and regulations which are in conflict with the statutes of the association. ZIFA, themselves, cannot come with their rules and regulations which are in conflict with those used by CAF and FIFA to run the game on the continent and around the world. Article 54 (2), of the ZIFA Constitution, places emphasis on that requirement.
‘‘The responsibilities and functions of these (judicial) bodies (the Disciplinary Committee, the Appeals Committee, the Ethics Committee) shall be stipulated in the Disciplinary Code of ZIFA, which shall comply with the FIFA Disciplinary Code, and the Code of Ethics of ZIFA,’’ reads the ZIFA Constitution.
The PSL also confirms that position in their rules and regulations. ‘‘The judicial bodies of PSL are: (a) the disciplinary committee; (b) the ethics committee, the responsibilities and functions of these bodies shall be stipulated in the Disciplinary Code of ZIFA,/ PSL which shall comply with the FIFA Disciplinary Code, and the Code of Ethics of PSL and ZIFA.’’
However, the PSL Disciplinary Code, which clearly stipulates it has to comply with the FIFA statutes, then pronounces a different position when it comes to reimbursement of costs, itself a move in violation of the FIFA/ CAF statutes.
‘‘Any appeal against the decision of the PSL Disciplinary Committee shall be noted to the ZIFA Appeals board as defined in Article 49 of the PSL Statutes,’’ the PSL Code says. Such (an) appeal shall be accompanied by a mandatory non-refundable stipulated fee.’’
Recently, Herentals won their case after the ZIFA Appeals Board overturned a decision by the PSL disciplinary committee to dock them three points, which would have sent them out of the top-flight league, by quashing both their conviction and sentence in a match-fixing case.
According to the judgment, the Students were ordered to pay additional costs, related to delays to the finalisation of the case. The first and second appellants (Herentals and Oliver Chirenga) shall be responsible for costs which exceeded the appeal fees jointly and severally, the judgment read, despite the appellants having won their case.
‘‘The first and second appellants are hereby ordered to pay wasted costs to the PSL disciplinary committee as per the ZIFA Appeals Board ruling of 5 March 2020.
‘‘ Thereafter, each party shall bear its own costs incurred by parties to the appeal as from 5th Match 2020.’’