Opinion: Why FIFA is unlikely to ratify FKF NEC resolution

The ongoing crisis at the Football Kenya Federation is steadily revealing more than just political divisions within the game. It is exposing deep governance weaknesses, procedural confusion and what appears to be a significant experience deficit among sections of the National Executive Committee.

What began as an attempt by a faction led by FKF vice president McDonald Mariga to remove federation president Hussein Mohamed, acting CEO Dennis Gicheru, and co-opted NEC member Abdalla Yusuf has now evolved into a wider governance and credibility crisis with potential implications for Kenyan football at both continental and global levels.

Ironically, the faction seeking accountability may have unintentionally exposed itself to scrutiny.

During appearances before Parliament’s Sports Committee, chaired by Hon. Dan Wanyama, members of the Mariga-led camp claimed that national team budgets presented to the Ministry of Sports had never been approved by the NEC as required under federation procedures. While the claim may have been intended to strengthen their case against the Hussein administration, it immediately raised uncomfortable questions.

If those budgets were never ratified, then on what basis did NEC members participate in national team assignments, travel with teams, and reportedly receive allowances funded through the same budgets they now describe as irregular? The contradiction creates a governance dilemma that could easily shift public and institutional attention toward the conduct of the accusers themselves.

The unfolding events also point to a broader concern: the apparent lack of high-level football administration experience within parts of the rebel faction.

Of the nine NEC members who backed the controversial April 24 resolution, a majority are serving in national football governance for the first time. Several have little or no experience managing football institutions at this level. That inexperience increasingly appears visible in both the strategy adopted and the procedures followed during the attempted ouster.

The procedural weaknesses surrounding the removal of Hussein Mohamed are likely one of the key reasons FIFA moved swiftly to intervene. FIFA’s request for NEC minutes, proof of quorum, evidence of proper notice and confirmation that affected officials were accorded a fair hearing suggests serious concerns over whether constitutional processes were followed.

That alone makes it unlikely FIFA will endorse the NEC resolution in its current form.

The world governing body traditionally places enormous emphasis on due process, constitutional compliance and institutional stability. Attempting to remove senior federation officials while appearing to sidestep the same constitution being invoked against them weakens the credibility of the process.

The situation has become even more complicated following intervention by the Kenyan courts. Both the Sports Disputes Tribunal and the High Court issued orders effectively suspending implementation of the NEC resolutions. Yet the political battles within the federation have continued, spilling into football operations and sponsorship matters.

One notable flashpoint involved the Safaricom Chapa Dimba Tournament, a major youth development competition. The Mariga faction questioned the sponsorship arrangement, arguing the NEC had not been involved in negotiations. The move briefly threatened a tournament that has become one of Kenya’s most important talent development pathways before public pressure forced a retreat.

That episode further highlighted confusion over the role of the NEC itself. In most modern football structures, sponsorship negotiations and operational matters fall under the federation secretariat, while the board focuses on policy and strategic oversight. Attempts to interfere in operational functions only reinforced concerns over institutional misunderstanding within sections of the leadership.

Unfortunately, the biggest casualty in all this remains Kenyan football.

The timing of the crisis could hardly be worse. Kenya is preparing to co-host the 2027 Africa Cup of Nations alongside Uganda and Tanzania under the Pamoja bid. Billions of shillings are already being invested in stadium upgrades, tournament infrastructure and organisational planning.

At a moment when Kenya should be projecting stability, professionalism and readiness, the country instead risks presenting an image of disorder and governance paralysis.

If the standoff is not resolved quickly through proper constitutional and legal channels, it could damage Kenya’s credibility with FIFA, CAF, sponsors and international stakeholders. More importantly, it risks undermining a once-in-a-generation opportunity to elevate Kenyan football on the continental stage.

In the end, this battle may not be remembered for who controlled FKF. It may instead be remembered as the moment personal ambitions threatened to overshadow the future of the game itself.

The writer is a veteran sports journalist