By Tomisin Farinola

Introduction
The principle of strict liability in football disciplinary proceedings has once again come to the fore with FIFA’s recent decision to deduct points from South Africa for fielding an ineligible player during their World Cup qualifier against Lesotho. While the result may appear harsh to some, the decision is consistent with FIFA’s longstanding approach of holding national associations accountable for regulatory breaches regardless of intent. This article critically examines FIFA’s strict liability doctrine, situates South Africa’s forfeiture within broader international sports law, and highlights its implications for African football governance.

Facts Leading to South Africa’s Forfeiture

On March 25, 2025, South Africa defeated Lesotho 2–0 in a FIFA World Cup qualifier. However, midfielder Teboho Mokoena, who had accumulated two yellow cards in earlier fixtures (against Benin and Zimbabwe), was suspended for that match under FIFA’s Disciplinary Code. Despite this, Mokoena played 82 minutes. FIFA subsequently awarded the match to Lesotho as a 3–0 victory, deducted three points from South Africa, and imposed a fine of CHF 10,000 on the South African Football Association (SAFA).This decision was announced by FIFA yesterday, September 29, 2025. [1]

This decision altered the Group C standings, with Benin overtaking South Africa on goal difference, and potentially affecting qualification for the 2026 World Cup.

The Legal Framework: FIFA’s Strict Liability Doctrine

Article 55 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code provides that if a team fields an ineligible player, the match is automatically forfeited as a 3–0 loss (unless the result was more disadvantageous).[2]The provision is grounded in the doctrine of strict liability, which ensures predictability and fairness by removing the need to prove intent.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has consistently upheld this principle. For example, in CAS 2005/A/916 & 917 – Maccabi Haifa v. UEFA, the panel affirmed that clubs bear absolute responsibility for ensuring compliance with player eligibility rules. Similarly, in CAS 2011/A/2425–Olympique des Alpes v. UEFA, CAS confirmed that strict liability applies irrespective of administrative mistakes or lack of bad faith. [5]

Policy Considerations and African Precedents
The South Africa case resonates strongly within Africa, where administrative lapses have frequently marred tournaments. For example:

• In 2014, Equatorial Guinea was disqualified from the Africa Women’s Championship for fielding an ineligible player.[3]
• In 2018, Sierra Leone was sanctioned by FIFA over governance issues that extended to player registration and eligibility disputes.[4]

These precedents reinforce the need for African football associations to develop robust compliance mechanisms. The costs of negligence are not only financial but also reputational and competitive.

Implications for Sports Law in Africa

1. Strengthening Governance Structures: The ruling underscores the urgency for African associations to improve record-keeping, player monitoring, and disciplinary enforcement.
2. Capacity Building: Many federations lack the legal and administrative expertise required to navigate FIFA’s regulatory regime. This gap increases vulnerability to sanctions.
3. Regional Integrity: Consistent application of strict liability enhances competitive integrity across CAF tournaments, discouraging tactical manipulation of suspensions or registrations.
4. Legal Accountability: Strict liability emphasizes institutional accountability rather than individual blame, thereby fostering a culture of collective responsibility.

Conclusion
South Africa’s forfeiture exemplifies FIFA’s unwavering application of strict liability, reaffirming the doctrine as central to international football governance. For African sports law, the case is a reminder that compliance failures whether through oversight or negligence carry significant consequences. If harnessed properly, this doctrine can serve as a catalyst for institutional reform across the continent, strengthening both legal frameworks and sporting integrity.

References/Footnotes

1. FIFA Disciplinary Committee Decision on South Africa v. Lesotho (September 2025), available at www.fifa.com. (Accessed on 30th of September, 2025) ↩
2. FIFA Disciplinary Code, 2023 edition, Article 55 – Forfeiture of a Match. Full text at www.fifa.com/legal. ↩(Accessed on 30th of September, 2025)
3. CAF Media Release, “Equatorial Guinea Disqualified from 2014 African Women’s Championship,” available at www.cafonline.com. ↩ (Accessed on 30th of September, 2025)
4. FIFA Circular No. 1628 on Sierra Leone FA Governance (2018), available at www.fifa.com. ↩ (Accessed on 30th of September, 2025)
5. Additional case law: CAS 2005/A/916 & 917 – Maccabi Haifa v. UEFA; CAS 2011/A/2425 – Olympique des Alpes v. UEFA. Summaries available at www.tas-cas.org. (Accessed on 30th of September, 2025)