.The “Alkan” final dispute.. “TAS” scenarios and the structure of Morocco’s legal advocacy | Dimalions
The “Alkan” final dispute.. “TAS” scenarios and the structure of Morocco’s legal advocacy
3 months ago
sports
The “Alkan” final dispute.. “TAS” scenarios and the structure of Morocco’s legal advocacy
Hesspress Sports·
An “institutional analysis memorandum” issued by the African Center for Strategic Studies and Digitalization (CAESD), on Friday, confirmed that the challenge before the “Court of Arbitration for Sport” in the event of a dispute in the 2025 African Cup of Nations final match is “finding a delicate balance: accepting an exceptional response to an exceptional case to not normalize unacceptable behavior, while ensuring that this exception does not turn into a normal technique to retroactively overturn the results.”
The memorandum entitled “The 2025 African Cup of Nations Final: From the title dispute to the stakes of governance, soft power and digital media” concluded that there was “a conflict between two legal logics.” The first reading (CAF) is based on Articles 82 and 84, where leaving the field without permission is considered an administrative loss (3 to zero). As for the second reading (Senegal), it focuses on the fact that the match was resumed and actually ended, and that changing the result later affects the “legal security” of the competition.
Based on a forward-looking analysis, the experts of the same center, based in Tangier, formulated the expected scenarios for the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS/CAS) decision, stressing that “the scenario of upholding the essence of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) decision is the relatively most likely possibility at the present time.” This assessment is based on the existence of a real and strong regulatory basis in the tournament regulations, as well as the seriousness and decisive nature of the conduct in question. There also emerges an urgent institutional need for sports bodies to deter the recurrence of such behaviors that may threaten the continuity of play and the competition system in the future.
Next in terms of “reasonableness” is “the possibility of moving toward a compromise or making a partial amendment to the decision.” In this path, the court may choose - according to the same analysis - to maintain the essence of the legal logic adopted by “CAF”, “but with intervention to mitigate some of the penal or sporting effects resulting from it.” This may include re-adjusting how sanctions are imposed to ensure that they are precisely proportional to the facts, while retaining part of the disciplinary or regulatory sanctions to ensure an element of deterrence.
On the other hand, issuing a decision in favor of Senegal remains a “serious possibility,” although it ranks lower than previous possibilities. This hypothesis derives its strength from “the weight of the argument for actually completing the match until its end, and the principle of legal security and stability of the results acquired on the field.” This possibility is also reinforced by the fact that not all of the Senegalese national team players left the field completely and simultaneously, which is a fact that the court may give considerable weight in its final evaluation.
As for the hypothesis of a rematch, the memorandum classifies it as a very weak and unlikely possibility. This is because replaying matches remains an exceptional solution linked to the presence of serious and proven flaws, such as corruption or confirmed arbitration manipulation. Since the current file lacks material evidence of this level, the court will most likely avoid this option in order to preserve the stability of the competition. Structure of the “Moroccan plea”
The aforementioned center stressed that the Moroccan perception of the legal advocacy in the “Cannes Morocco 2025 Final” file should be built on four axes, which it enumerated in “the legal text: strict adherence to Articles 82 and 84 that protect the continuity of play,” and “the context of force majeure: the claim that completing the match was for the necessities of public security and to avoid a disaster on the field, and not a waiver of the legal right.”
He also called for the necessity of “the structure of the Moroccan plea before the Court of Arbitration for Sport” to be based on “an organizational rupture: proving that the players’ exit for 17 minutes constituted a rupture that cannot be cleansed by simply returning,” leading to “the logic of deterrence: emphasizing that not punishing this behavior will encourage teams in the future to use leaving the field as a pressure tool.”
In a related context, the analytical paper - as read by Hespress - focused on “the structure of the Senegalese pleading (for understanding and preparing for a response).”
The memorandum expected that Senegal would focus on both “field authority” (the match was resumed and reached its end under the referee’s authority), as well as “partial exit: the argument that the team did not leave as a whole, making it a temporary protest rather than a total withdrawal,” also raising “the principle of proportionality: arguing that turning the result into a complete loss is an excessive measure compared to the actual act.”
The memorandum contained nine “strategic recommendations directed to decision makers,” focusing primarily on the “Crisis Protocol,” adopting a written protocol within CAF to manage cases of outages or mass exits.
It also called for issuing “immediate technical and security reports after major incidents to clarify the decision-making chain,” as well as “clarifying the regulations: addressing the legal vacuum related to the relationship between temporary withdrawal and the resumption of play.”
She pointed out the importance of “training officials: strengthening the capabilities of governors and delegates in managing crises within hostile environments,” and adopting “sober communication: adopting non-ceremonial institutional language to avoid turning the legal file into a political crisis.”
Among the recommendations also is “proactive diplomacy, by presenting offers of cooperation to the continent (training rulers, supporting infrastructure) to demonstrate that legal firmness is accompanied by a desire for development.”
She called for “strengthening the French and English-speaking public media to defend the Moroccan narrative in Africa and Europe,” with “digital investment: integrating influencers and improving the ability to quickly explain legal positions via digital platforms,” concluding with a recommendation to “shift momentum,” to ensure that sporting success is transformed into “sustainable development and institutional impact.”
Drawing a “final conclusion,” the paper emphasized that it “does not aim to plead in favor of one party, but rather to measure the strength of the two logics (mentioned above).” Among its conclusions, it emphasized that “the competition cannot be stable unless the matches that constitute it are stable and disciplined.” The true test of “sufficient” is “the reconciliation between behavioral deterrence and the legal security of outcomes.”
