Samson Siasia’s FIFA Life Ban Reduce to Five Years
Samsom
Siasia’s life ban from football has been reduced to five years by the Court of
Arbitration for Sports.
In August
2019, world football body FIFA banned Siasia who was a former Super Eagles
player for life and fined him $50,000 and for agreeing to ‘the manipulation of
matches’ for betting purposes.
According to
FIFA, the Olympic silver medallist’s former Super Eagles coach’s ban emanated from
an extensive investigation into matches that Wilson Perumal attempted to fix.
A statement
from FIFA’s independent Ethics Committee said, “Siasia was found guilty of
having accepted that he would receive bribes in relation to the manipulation of
matches that
A statement
from FIFA’s independent Ethics Committee said, “Siasia was found guilty of
having accepted that he would receive bribes in relation to the manipulation of
matches that Perumal attempted to manipulate for betting purposes.”
But Siasia
denied the charges and appealed the ban at CAS.
In its
judgment, CAS said it “determined the imposition of a life ban to be
disproportionate for a first offense which was committed passively and which
had not had an adverse or immediate effect on football stakeholders, and that a
five-year ban would still achieve the envisaged aim of punishing the
infringement committed by Mr Siasia.”
The court
also cancelled the $50,000 fine imposed on Siasia by FIFA, while the ban was
backdated to start on August 16, 2019
In 2010, a
match fixer tried to involve Mr Siasia as a coach of a club under his strict
instructions. With the promise of employment benefits, Mr Siasia would have had
to always field several players under the control of the match fixer.
“The
negotiations between the match fixer and Mr Siasia in relation to the
conditions of employment were conducted by email over a period of two months.
“Eventually,
the club did not accept or could not afford Mr. Siasia’s requests and the
negotiations ended,” CAS revealed.
CAS also
acknowledged the need for sanctions to be sufficiently high enough to eradicate
bribery and especially match-fixing in football.
“However,
the panel considered in the particular circumstances of this matter that it
would be inappropriate and excessive to impose a financial sanction in addition
to the five-year ban, since the ban sanction already incorporated a financial
punishment in eliminating football as a source of revenue for Mr Siasia.
“And
considering that Mr Siasia had not obtained any gain or pecuniary benefit from
his unethical behaviour,” CAS added.
No comments