The “Can Final” dispute raises legal problems regarding the limits of government interventions

The Senegalese government's communication, which transferred the African Football Cup file from its sporting scope to an open political and legal level, sparked widespread discussion within football and legal circles, amid anticipation of what it might have direct repercussions on the Senegalese Football Federation and its national team, especially in light of the sensitivity of the decisions related to continental titles.

Yesterday, Wednesday, the Senegal government issued a statement in which it explicitly expressed its rejection of the decision of the Appeals Committee of the Confederation of African Football (CAF), to withdraw the title from its national team and give it to Morocco, which sparked a controversy among sports law experts and observers regarding the validity of the approved procedures and the limits of possible appeal.

Experts told Hespress: “This political move opens the door to unprecedented legal and sporting complications, which would escalate the conflict outside the usual sporting framework, and put the Senegalese Football Association before real tests related to the extent of its respect for the principle of the independence of sports bodies. It may also have repercussions on the level of its relationship with the African and international federations.”

Mourad Al-Ajoouti, President of the Lawyers Club in Morocco, stated that the decision issued by the Appeals Committee of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) on March 17, 2026, is considered a decision that has exhausted all internal methods of appeal, and now has the authority of res judicata within the corridors of the Continental Confederation, stating that “the jurisdiction of CAF has ended with the issuance of this decision.”

Al-Ajouti added in a statement to Hespress: “From a purely legal standpoint, the Moroccan national team is considered the champion of the 2025 edition immediately after the issuance of the decision, and merely submitting the appeal before the ‘Bass’ does not have any effect on implementing the penalty or withdrawing the titles, unless the court issues an exceptional decision with ‘temporary measures’ to stop the implementation, which requires complex proofs related to damage that cannot be repaired.”

He pointed out that “the Senegalese Federation’s failure to appeal the initial decision is considered a kind of ‘implicit acceptance’ of the validity of the facts attributed to it at the time,” adding that “the facts that the Senegalese Federation did not dispute before the CAF Appeals Committee have become ‘established judicial facts’ that may not be re-argued before the Court of Arbitration for Sport.”

Regarding the statement issued by the Senegalese government, for Al-Ajoti it is a “dangerous legal slippage.” He said: “Looking at Article 19 of the FIFA Statutes, it appears clearly that the principle of ‘independence of sports federations’ is a red line that does not lend itself to interpretation,” adding that “the language of the statement that speaks of ‘the state’s rejection of the decision’ and ‘a request to open international investigations into corruption’ is classified in sports law as ‘third-party interference’.”