NAIROBI, Kenya – FIFA has warned the Football Kenya Federation (FKF) that the growing number of football-related disputes being taken to Kenyan courts could expose the federation to disciplinary action, renewing pressure on its leadership to strengthen internal dispute-resolution mechanisms.
In a letter dated October 5, 2026, and addressed to FKF Acting General Secretary Dennis Gicheru, FIFA Chief Member Associations Officer Elkhan Mammadov raised concern over court proceedings involving the federation, its members, officials and football activities.
The correspondence, which became public on Saturday, October 31, identified disputes involving competitions, elections, membership, disciplinary decisions and other aspects of football administration as matters that should ordinarily be handled through recognised football arbitration structures.
“We have taken note with concern of the increasing number of proceedings brought before ordinary courts in matters that appear to be intrinsically related to the organisation, administration and governance of football in Kenya,” FIFA stated.
The global governing body did not announce an immediate suspension or sanction against Kenya but warned that violations of its autonomy rules could be referred to its competent bodies for consideration of appropriate measures.
FIFA wants football disputes handled outside ordinary courts
FIFA based its warning on Article 69 of the FKF Constitution (2017 edition), which provides for football-related disputes to be resolved through arbitration rather than ordinary courts, except where FIFA regulations, the federation’s constitution or binding legal provisions allow judicial intervention.
The provision gives priority to independent arbitration tribunals recognised by FKF or the Confederation of African Football (CAF), as well as the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), based in Lausanne, Switzerland.
FIFA also cited Article 51 of its statutes, which restricts member associations and their affiliates from taking football-related disputes to ordinary courts unless specific regulatory or legal exceptions apply.
The provision also addresses applications for provisional measures through ordinary courts, reinforcing FIFA’s position that football disputes should generally be resolved through established sporting judicial systems.
Warning touches on FKF’s independence
Mammadov further referred to Article 14(1)(i), read together with Article 19 of the FIFA Statutes, which require member associations to manage their affairs independently and protect their operations from undue interference by third parties.
FIFA maintains that the autonomy of national football associations is central to its governance framework and expects member associations to ensure their officials and affiliates comply with the relevant statutes.
In its letter, the organisation asked FKF to take all necessary steps within its authority to ensure that football-related disputes are channelled through the mechanisms established under its constitution and FIFA regulations.
The federation was also asked to provide regular updates on significant developments in the ongoing court proceedings identified by FIFA.
Kenyan courts retain a role where the law allows
FIFA’s position does not automatically place every dispute involving football beyond the reach of Kenyan courts.
Article 69 of the FKF Constitution itself recognises exceptions where FIFA regulations, the constitution or binding legal provisions specifically allow recourse to ordinary courts.
Kenyan judicial decisions have also considered the relationship between football arbitration provisions and the jurisdiction of domestic courts. In a 2020 High Court decision addressing the FKF and FIFA dispute-resolution rules, the court examined the scope of disputes covered by those provisions and distinguished them from matters properly before it.
The distinction is important because the autonomy rules governing football associations do not, on their own, establish that every dispute involving a federation or its officials must be excluded from the national judicial system.
FKF governance disputes remain under scrutiny
The warning comes amid continuing governance disagreements within FKF, including disputes involving its leadership and the management of the federation.
The disagreements have spilled into legal proceedings, with competing positions emerging among members of the National Executive Committee over decisions affecting the federation’s administration.
Other disputes involving clubs and competition decisions have also reached judicial and sporting dispute-resolution bodies, illustrating the challenges facing football administration in Kenya.
In September, Kariobangi Sharks faced disciplinary proceedings after taking a dispute involving FKF to court, highlighting the tensions between the federation’s internal rules and clubs’ pursuit of judicial remedies.
FIFA’s latest correspondence places the responsibility on FKF to demonstrate that its dispute-resolution framework is functioning and that its members are observing the applicable rules.
