Mali Football in Crisis: Fémafoot Accused of Electoral Abuses as Ad Hoc Commissions Face Scrutiny

A storm of controversy is engulfing Malian football’s governing body, Fémafoot, casting a long shadow over the integrity of its upcoming internal elections. At the heart of the dispute are serious allegations of procedural abuse, a lack of transparency, and the unilateral appointment of ad hoc electoral commissions tasked with overseeing the entire process. The situation has escalated into a formal legal challenge, threatening to derail the electoral timeline and further erode confidence in the federation’s leadership.

A Process Under Fire

Ahead of the election of members for the first instance and appeal electoral commissions, a coalition of clubs and associations has come forward with a damning indictment of the Executive Committee’s conduct. The core grievance revolves around what critics describe as a deeply flawed and opaque process. The ad hoc electoral commissions, established to conduct the electoral process, have been accused of invalidating candidacies without valid reason, operating in a veil of secrecy that raises fundamental questions about the legitimacy of the entire exercise.

“We are witnessing a systematic breakdown of due process,” one insider commented, speaking on condition of anonymity. “When the minutes from the review of candidacy lists are not communicated, it naturally breeds suspicion. It makes you wonder what is being hidden and whether these lists were ever given a fair hearing.” This lack of transparency is a central pillar of the formal complaints now being lodged.

The Case of Salim Cissé: A Test of Legality

The controversy crystallizes in the specific case of Mr. Salim Cissé, whose candidacy for the position of President of the first instance electoral commission was invalidated by the ad hoc body. The challengers have launched a formal appeal, arguing that the commission’s actions were not only unjust but illegal.

An Alleged Violation of the Electoral Code

The legal challenge hinges on Article D2.4 of the Fémafoot electoral code, a clause the complainants say was blatantly ignored. The article clearly states that if a candidate for President is invalidated after the submission deadline, “the list in question is automatically rejected.” The only exception is in a case of force majeure, such as death or a disabling illness, which allows for a replacement within three days.

However, the first instance ad hoc electoral commission did not reject the list. Instead, it invalidated Mr. Cissé’s candidacy and then suggested his replacement—an action the appellants argue is a clear overreach. “The decision to authorize and suggest a replacement in the absence of a case of force majeure is a decision beyond the powers of the commission, and is therefore tainted by illegality,” the formal challenge states. In essence, the commission is accused of creating its own rules, bypassing the established legal framework.

Questioning the Grounds for Invalidation

Beyond the procedural misstep, the very grounds for invalidating Mr. Cissé’s candidacy are being contested. The commission cited issues with his CV and a copy of his diploma. The appellants have countered these claims forcefully, presenting evidence that his CV was fully completed and that the copy of his diploma was officially certified as conforming to the original.

Furthermore, the challengers point to obstructive behavior from within Fémafoot itself. They allege that the Secretary General of Fémafoot refused to issue a standard receipt summarizing all documents submitted—a direct violation of Article D2.2 of the electoral code. It reportedly required the intervention of a court bailiff, commissioned by the involved clubs, to finally obtain a simple receipt the following day, and even then, it lacked a full inventory of the provided documents.

This bureaucratic stonewalling, they argue, was a deliberate tactic to create pretexts for later disqualification. “We attribute to the Secretary General, for the observed shortcomings, sole responsibility for this violation,” the challenge document asserts, suggesting a coordinated effort to sideline certain candidates.

A Broader Pattern of Dysfunction

The case of Mr. Cissé is not seen in isolation but as symptomatic of a wider pattern. The unilateral appointment of the ad hoc commissions by the Executive Committee has raised eyebrows, suggesting a process designed to be controlled rather than independent. When the very bodies meant to ensure a fair election are themselves the product of a non-consensual decision, the entire foundation of the electoral process is compromised.

How can there be faith in a system where the referees are chosen by one team? This is the question being asked by many in the Malian football community. The coalition of sponsoring teams, which includes clubs like EFCM (Espérance Football Club de Médine), Lafia Club de Bamako, and CS Dougouwolofila, among others, is now demanding accountability and a return to the rule of law.

Demands for Rectification

In their formal submission to the first instance ad hoc electoral commission, the appellants have laid out clear demands. They have asked the commission to:

1. Declare their challenge admissible and well-founded.

2. Cancel the decision to invalidate Mr. Cissé’s candidacy and the subsequent authorization for a replacement.

3. Order the reinstatement of Mr. Cissé and other candidates invalidated without valid reason, thereby validating their list.

As a subsidiary request, should the commission maintain the invalidation, they demand it follow the law to its logical conclusion: the outright rejection of the entire list, as mandated by Article D2.4. This, they argue, would at least “restore the legality of the process,” even if it means their exclusion, proving that the rules apply to everyone equally.

What’s at Stake for Malian Football?

The outcome of this dispute has implications far beyond the fate of a single candidate. Malian football, rich in talent and passion, has long grappled with administrative challenges. A transparent and credible electoral process is fundamental to restoring faith in Fémafoot’s governance, ensuring that the sport is managed for the benefit of all stakeholders—clubs, players, and fans alike.

Failure to address these allegations fairly could deepen existing divisions, potentially inviting scrutiny from international bodies like FIFA and CAF, which have low tolerance for political interference and electoral malfeasance in member associations. The world is watching to see if Malian football can navigate this crisis with integrity or if it will succumb to internal power plays.

As the ad hoc electoral commission deliberates, the future of football governance in Mali hangs in the balance. The decision will either mark a step toward accountability and reform or signal a deepening of the crisis, leaving the beautiful game in the country mired in controversy.

Source: Mali Tribune via Bamada.net