Introduction

The origin of football in Nigeria dates back to the twentieth century.[i] The first recorded football match in Nigeria was played on June 15, 1904 in Calabar, Cross River.[ii] Having formed the Nigeria Football Association in 1945, the national team played its first official match against Sierra Leone on October 8, 1949.[iii] Nigeria won 2.0. Presently, the most prevalent sport in Nigeria is football.[iv]As with other parts of the world, football in Nigeria has become a profit-making industry.

In 2013, Globacom, a telecommunication company in Nigeria signed a 3-year deal to sponsor the Nigeria league for the sum of N1.9 Billion.[v]Thus, in the process of making profit in the game of football, disputes are bound to arise.Conventionally, the traditional practice of dispute resolution has been the regular court system of litigation. It is our submission that, this traditional type ofdispute resolution is not favourable to football disputes. It takes upexcessive time, high cost incurred by litigants and as well as the malice that embodies litigation. It also makes enemies of litigants since it promotes a loser-winner outcome. Hence, it is the aim of this paper to demonstrate that litigation is unsuitable insettling football disputes, and as such an alternative dispute resolution institution (arbitration) should be established for quick and effective dispensation of disputes in football. In other words, arbitration has proven to be an extremely successful method of resolving football disputes and it has gained the favour and confidence of the sporting world. By so doing, this article will also show landmark cases/examples wherein the regular courts have failed in effectively settling football disputes.

A Brief Appraisal of Arbitration as an Alternative Dispute Resolution

The notion of arbitration as an institution has existed since antiquity. It is the method of dispute resolution involving one or more neutral thirdparties, who are agreed to by the disputing parties, and whose decision is binding.[vi] Put in another term, arbitration is the process of settling of a dispute by a third party called – the arbitrator. He is appointed to resolve the dispute between the parties. The decision (award) of the arbitrator is final and binding on the parties.In this case, the arbitrator’s decision (award) is final and binding. Thus, the basis for the arbitration is the consent of the parties to submit or refer their disputes to arbitration.[vii]

The decision of an arbitrator can be enforced by a party by making an application to the court for recognition of the decision. After this recognition, the award will be deemed to be a judgment or order of the court.[viii]

Suitability of Arbitration in Football Disputes

As reiterated above, one of the common problems associated with litigation is the excessive time it takes for disputes to be settled. Even when judgment is obtained, the process of enforcement is also time exhaustive, hence the need for arbitration. Again, another peculiarity of football dispute is that–it is time sensitive.At times disputes among players and teams do come up in the middle of a transfer window or an ongoing competition. So in this case, there is need for it to be resolved timeously in order not to delay the competition or distractthe teams and players involved. After the 2013 African Cup of Nations, foreign teams were jolting to sign SundayMba, but this was proved difficult because of the ownership tussle between Rangers International and Warri Wolves. Rangers claimed they bought Mba from Warri Wolves. And Warri Wolves on the other hand claimed they never sold Mba to Rangers.[ix] Thiscontroversy lingered for a long time because there was no appropriate forum to settle it.The League Management Committee could not solve the crisis, and the controversy heavily affected Mba’s career. At a point Mba was without a club for two years due to that crisis.

Furthermore, the case UEFA v. Jean-Marc Bosman[x] has made arbitration so important to the football and sporting community in general. Marc-Jean Bosman, a Belgian footballer, played for Belgian First Division team R.F.C. de Liege. Upon the expiration of his contract, his intended move to French club, Dunkerque failed because the French club failed to meet the transfer fee demanded by his Belgian club. The rules as at then allowed clubs to obtain a transfer fee for players despite expired contract. Bosman went to court on the ground that those rules amounted to restraint of trade and violated the principle of free movement of workers established in the European Union (EU). After five years of heated litigation and appeals, the case reached the European Court of Justice, where the Court ruled in favour of Bosman. It held that EU players may now move to another club without a transfer fee, upon the expiration of their contract.

Despite this victory for Bosman, he lost considerable part of his career due to the pendency of the case which took five years before it could be resolved by the court. Having played in the Belgian First Division prior to the trial, he moved to playing in the French lower leagues during the period of the trial, ending up at Belgian Third Division team C.S. Vise after the trial.

Another case that is also similar to the Bosman’s case is the South African case ofCoetzee v Comitis and Others.[xi] Coetzee was a professional player who found it difficult to obtain his clearance certificate from his previous club after the expiration of his contract with the club. Aggrieved, Coetzee instituted an action in the South African High Court. One of the grounds for his action was that National Soccer League Constitution and Rules relating to the transfer of players were inconsistent with the Constitution of South Africa and therefore be declared invalid. After many years of contentious litigation, the court found in Coetzee’s favour and declared part of the NSL Constitution and Rules inconsistent with the South African Constitution. This was a great victory for Coetzee, but the lengthy time of litigation obviously affected Coetzee’s football career.

In contrast to the above cases, an arbitration tribunal did not take long to decide the parties’ fate in the case of FC Dinamo Minsk v Christian Obodo.[xii] The fact of this case was that, the Nigerian international entered into a one year contract with FC Dinamo. During one of the training sessions, the player suffered a sharp pain located around his belly and the pubic area.After series of tests in the club’s emergency hospital, he was diagnosed with an unspecified infection to be treated with antibiotics. Given that the player’s health did not improve, he travelled outside Belarus for medical treatment. The club got aggrieved and terminated their contract with the player. The tribunal held that if a player has followed all the medical instructions of the club, but after a few months still has not resolved his physical problems, it is lawful for him to seek an alternative and independent medical opinion. The tribunal further awarded the player compensation to the tune of EUR 170,000 plus interests at the rate of 5% p.a. as of the expiry of time limit granted for its payment.

The illustration we are trying to make in Obodo’s case is quite simple. The matter was instituted in 2015 and verdict was given in 2016. One can see how fast arbitration tribunals can be. Within the space of one year the rights and liabilities of the parties were clearly determined. Comparing the timewith Boseman’scase and that Cortezee’s one would discover the glaring disparity. If Obodo’scase was to be taken to a regular court, only God knows when it could be resolved.

Keeping Football Disputes Out Of Court: The Way Forward Nigeria

The world governing body for football, Federation of International Football Association (FIFA), has stipulated that “recourse to ordinary courts of law is prohibited.”[xiii] In the same vein, FIFA mandated all national associations to insert a clause in their regulations forbidding football disputes from being taken to the regular courts, rather such disputes should be taken to a recognized independent and duly constituted arbitration tribunal. The Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) is a member association identified by FIFA as being the chief regulator and administrator of football competitions in Nigeria. Thus, in meeting the mandate of FIFA, the NFF in Articles 4(3) of its Statute provides as follows:

Article 4:

NFF shall provide the necessary institutional means to resolve any internal dispute that may arise between Members, Clubs, Officials and Players of NFF.

Article 72 also goes further state that:

NFF shall establish a NATIONAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER which shall deal with all internal national disputes between NFF, its members, players, officials, match and players agent that do not fall under jurisdiction of its judicial bodies.

In addition to the above, the Nigeria Professional Football League (NPFL), the topflight league in Nigeria also made regulations for the National Dispute Resolution Chamber(NDRC) in contractual matters between clubs and players.[xiv]

It is regrettable to state at this point that the NFF is yet to establish the NDRC for resolution of football disputes in Nigeria. It is submitted that since the NFF has neglected to establish the NDRC, a statutory NDRC should be enacted vide an Act of National Assembly. In the alternative, the Nigerian Football Federation Act should be amended with the inclusion of NDRC as a statutory tribunal. Upon the enactment, its jurisdiction would be solely for resolving football dispute and other related matters. This would go a long way in redressing the numerous internal football disputes in Nigeria.

The nonexistence of a functional dispute resolution chamber in Nigeria has resulted in many football disputes either going unresolved or being taken to a regular court. In 2004, Ray Nnaji instituted a legal action in the Federal High Court against the National Executive of the Nigerian Referees Association on the ground that the National Executive is not the proper party to conduct the elections into all the office of the Association. During the course of the proceeding, a preliminary objection was raised to the effect that the plaintiff lacked the locus standi to sue the Association on the ground that he has neither been nominated as a candidate nor paid fees in accordance with the rules of the Association. The Court agreed with the defendants and arrived at the conclusion that the plaintiff’s suit is incompetent as he lack (lacks) the requisite locus standi to institute same. Aggrieved by this decision, Ray Nnaji appealed to the Court of Appeal. It took the Court of Appeal six years to hear the appeal. In determination of the appeal, it allowed the appeal and ordered that the case be remitted to the trial Court to be re-assigned by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to another Judge who should determine it on the merits.[xv] It is most likely that if recourse had been made to an available internal arbitration tribunal, such as NDRC, the disputes between Nnaji and the Association he sought to be a part of would not have lingered for more than seven years unresolved.

Apart from the lengthy time in litigation, the technicality in litigation too is also a factor in keeping football disputes out of the regular courts. In Igbuya v Dealt State Football Association[xvi] the claimant maintained an action against the Delta State Government in the National Industrial Court, claiming the sum of ₦96,219,000.00 as arrears for the overhead costs of running of the club as well as salaries of officials and players for the previous three years. After few years of intense litigation, the court arrived at the decision that although the Nigeria Football Association Act envisaged the creation of State Football Associations, but the Act did not create them as juristic persons capable of suing and being sued. Thus, the case was struck out by the court.

These cases illustrated above haveshown the futility and ineptitude of litigation in resolving football-related dispute. It is extremely difficult for football disputes to be effectively dispensed when litigated. Therefore, any attempt to do such will surely end in futility as was also seen in September 2014, where the players and coaches of the disbanded Jos University Teaching Hospital JUTH Football Club dragged the management of the institution to court for allegedly unilaterally disbanding the club without following the due process. They accused the present Chief Medical Director of JUTH, Prof Edmond Banwant of allegedly disbanding the club when he came on board.[xvii]The case is still pending as at the time of writing this article.

Conclusion/Recommendations

Conclusively, football disputes are increasing on a daily basis, and from all indications, litigation is not the most appropriate channel of dealing with such matters. Hence the need for the establishment of NDRC in resolving those disputes. We have seen from above how the nonexistence of NDRC has clogged the easy settlement of football disputes in Nigeria.

Therefore, arbitration has become an important dispute resolution mechanism in the development of football in Nigeria.

It is recommended as follows:

The NFF should abide by its regulation by establishing a NDRC for football. In the alternative, the NFF Act should be amended to include the creation of NDRC, with its jurisdiction solely on football related matters.
The NFF and other league management bodies should ensure that the decision of the NDRC is enforced. They should impose severe sanctions for any club, player, coach, agent who disobeys NDRC’s decision. For instance, deduction of points or expulsion from the league in the case of club.
The decision of the NDRC, being final, shall be submitted for appeal by an aggrieved party to Confederation of Africa Football (CAF) and subsequently to FIFA.

By Nonso Obiadazie LL.B (Nig) BL (in-view)

The author is a law graduate from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka. He is currently undergoing his law school programme at the Nigerian Law School, Kano Campus. He can be reached vide 08105075723 or nonsoobiadazie@gmail.com.

REFERENCES

[i]Akindutire, Isaac Olu ‘The Historical Development of Soccer in Nigeria: An Appraisal of Its Emerging Prospects’ (1991) (22) Canadian Journal of History of Sport 20.

[ii]Wiebe Boer ‘The History of Football in Nigeria: A Story of Heroes and Epics 1904 to 1960’ (June 12, 2018) www.punchng.com/new-book-traces-nigerian-football-history.com accessed 12 October, 2020.

[iii]ChetaNwanze ‘A Brief History of the Nigeria’s Supe Eagles’ (October 6, 2014) www.africasacountry.com/2014/06/a-brief-history-of-nigerias-super-eagles.com accessed 15 September, 2020.

[iv]BayoOlupohunda ‘Why Are Nigerians Crazy About Premiership?’ (March 20, 2014) www.punchng.com/opinion/why-are-nigerians-crazy-about-premiership.com accessed 22 October, 2020..

[v]Biyi ‘GLO ends NPFL Sponsorship as Zenith, Etisalat Battle for Position’ (November, 30, 2018) www.google.com/amp/s/soccernet.ng/2016/02/glo-end-npfl-sponsorship-as-zeni.html/amp accessed 14 September, 2020.

[vi]StabiliniVisinoni Limited v Mallinson& Partners Limited (2014) AELR 4111 (CA), Per Augie, J.C.A (pp 35-36, para G-D)

[vii] Fabian Ajogwu, SAN Commercial Arbitration in Nigeria, 2nd Edition

[viii]Section 31(3) of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act Cap A18 LFN, 2004

[ix]www.goal.com/en-ng/news/4093/nigerian-football/2013/04/01/3869047/warri-wolves-deny-making-offer-for-sunday-mba-with-rangers accessed 21 October, 2020

[x] December 15, 1995, 1995 E.C.R. 1-4921.

[xi]2001(1) SA 1254 (C).

[xii]CAS 2015/A/4327

[xiii] Article 68(2) of Federation International Football Association Statutes

[xiv] Section D of the NPFL Rule Framework.

[xv]Barrister Ray Nnaji v. Nigerian Football Association & Anor (2010) LPELR-4629(CA)

[xvi] Suit No: NIC/EN/32/2011.

[xvii]www.allafrica.com/stories/201409260565.html accessed 22 September, 2020.