By: Momodou Lamin Bah
Three months ago, on April 25, 2025, to be precise, I wrote a piece on the dispute resolution debacle that has engulfed the Gambian football administration. The piece, which is titled “Locked out of the Game: Dispute Resolution Crises in Gambian Football,” was inspired and necessitated by the legal disputes involving the URR Regional Football Association, its four affiliated clubs, and The Gambia Football Federation (GFF,) which has become the subject of litigation before the High Court of The Gambia. The presiding judge stayed the litigation proceedings for the parties to exhaust the internal dispute resolution mechanism within the football pyramid.
I am indeed glad to hear the decision of the GFF, acting pursuant to the provisions of its 2022 Constitution, to establish an Ad Hoc Tribunal to determine the matter involving the parties in this case. This is a step in the right direction and a welcome development in our football governance. While I commend the GFF for this decision, I would like to share my objective opinion on this progressive step to highlight the appropriate and proper legal basis for its operation.
The Ad hoc Tribunal is a judicial body established for a specific case and must adhere to relevant laws and regulations in its proceedings. To put it simply, institutions, most especially judicial organs, cannot and should not operate in a vacuum. It is both a legal requirement and a customary practice, as well as the best accepted international standards, for sports Tribunals to have regulations that provide for the mandate, the constitution of the tribunal’s members, personal jurisdiction, procedures, and costs of proceedings.
The Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS), the global sports supreme court, has its own Code (Code of Sports-related Arbitration) which provides the jurisdiction (both personal and subject matter) of the Court, the constitution of the arbitration panel, the procedures, and detailed arbitral costs which guide its functioning. CAS is equally immensely popular for establishing ad hoc Tribunals to attain a speedy arbitration process during all major sporting events, with the most recent one being the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 ad hoc Division. However, despite having its own Code, the Court always provides for procedural rules that are independent of the Code, which serve as a guide for its ad hoc divisions.
In the case of the said GFF ad hoc Tribunal, I have not seen the GFF make public any such document that serves as the procedural guide for the Tribunal. Article 64 of the GFF Constitution, which caters for the establishment of an Arbitration Tribunal, provides that the “Executive Committee shall draw up special regulations regarding the composition, jurisdiction and procedural rules of the Arbitration Tribunal.” It is important to note that the wording of the provision mandates the Executive Committee to provide this guiding document. Thus, it is my considered view that before the establishment of the Tribunal, the proper legislative framework should have been put in place. This is not discretionary, but a legal obligation on the GFF Executive Committee. I understand the urgency of this matter, considering the need for an uninterrupted football calendar; nevertheless, it should not be a barrier to the adherence to constitutional provisions by the GFF leadership – legality should take precedence over urgency. Having these frameworks established before taking any action is required by law and considered standard procedure.
It is therefore my observation that while establishing a Tribunal is a prudent move, albeit a reactive decision, the GFF leadership must comply with the due legal requirements for establishing the ad hoc Tribunal. The exact legal requirements must be met for the establishment of the main Tribunal itself.
Moving forward, as I look forward to the establishment of the Tribunal, I would like to advance a few propositions that I think may be crucial for the GFF to take note of.
- Mandate and standing:
On the mandate of the Tribunal, the GFF needs to be clear, detailed and go beyond what has been provided for in the 2022 Constitution. Article 64 of the constitution provides for the establishment of “Arbitration Tribunal, which shall deal with all disputes between the GFF, its Members, Officials and match and players’ agents that do not fall under the jurisdiction of its Judicial Bodies.” While this may appear broad, it does not cater for all eventualities. The limitation of the Tribunal’s mandate to these personnel could pose future problems. A thorough examination of our football pyramids, particularly local/community football, reveals that there are hardly any suitable legal structures. A sizeable number of the clubs/teams competing in the nawetans, for instance, or the new local academies formed are not registered as corporate bodies, which makes it difficult to ascertain who has the right to legal ownership of the club/team or academy in question. It is important to note that with the recent surge in the international transfer of Gambian athletes, there will be, as has been the case, the influx of financial gains emanating from either the FIFA Training Compensation or Solidarity Mechanism to some of the clubs/teams or academies that have played a role in the development of the athlete in question. Therefore, future disputes related to the ownership of a club/team, or academy, are likely to arise. Should there be any such dispute, the parties may lack the standing before the Tribunal as they do not appear to fall under any of the above lists provided for by the constitutional provision. What should wholistically inform the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is beyond the scope of this opinion, which only seeks to give a brief suggestion of what could be done.
- Constitution of the Tribunal
Sports Arbitration Tribunals, although a bit different in operation from the conventional courts, should be chaired by a legally minded person. This is not in any way intended to ridicule the capacity of individuals with no legal background. But considering the complexities of the legal issues such Tribunals would have to deal with, it is important to ensure that the person leading the proceedings has the right legal training, preferably with an understanding or love for the game of football. This will help reduce the endless appeals of the Tribunal’s decisions. Other non-legally minded persons can form a part of the Tribunal panel, factoring in the nature of the claim before it to avoid overcomplicating the proceedings. It is crucial to note that appeals from the Tribunal would lie to the CAS or the FIFA Tribunal which appears highly unaffordable to a Gambian club.
- Cost
The proceedings before the Tribunal should be affordable for the parties in dispute. Inspiration could be drawn from the FIFA Tribunal, which offers proceedings where one of the parties is an athlete, coach, or agent, for instance. This will provide the parties with an affordable justice mechanism.
With the evolution of sports, particularly football, from a game of pleasure to a commercial hub, and the stakes becoming higher, conflicts will inevitably emerge. It is therefore fundamental for football regulators to put in place the proper legal mechanisms, backed by due process.
