Its own league committee was ill-equipped to decide on Inter Kashi’s re-registration of foreign player Mario Barco, the All India Football Federation conceded to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, in an apparent admission of a miscarriage of procedure while dealing with the issue that ultimately decided the I-League championship.
According to reports from News9 Sports, the federation, through a 240-page document, argued why its appeal committee’s decision to deduct four points from Inter Kashi and declare Churchill Brothers as I-League champions was ‘legally sound’ and based on a correct interpretation of the I-League regulations.
“The re-registration of Mr. Barco was impermissible under the governing rules, and the AIFF Appeals Committee rightly held that Inter Kashi FC had fielded an ineligible player and that the consequences under the AIFF Disciplinary Code and the AIFF Regulations on Status and Transfer of Players must follow,” AIFF said in its initial submission.
The matter had landed in the lap of the appeal committee via the disciplinary committee after approval of re-registration from the league committee, whose opinion tainted the entire process, the federation told CAS.
“…, the AIFF League Committee’s act of suggesting that the re-registration of Mr. Barco may be approved, in the absence of a statutory provision for exercising such authority, was null and void in law, incapable of being cured. Accordingly, the reliance placed by Inter Kashi FC on the League Committee’s opinion/suggestion is misconceived and untenable.
The federation noted that, as per its statutes, an approval from the executive committee was needed for the league committee’s decisions or suggestions to come into effect, which didn’t happen in this instance.
“The consequent step taken by the AIFF Competitions Department to enable the CMS portal should not in any manner be construed as its decision. Rather, each club is still liable to comply with the regulations and bears strict liability pertaining to rule violations.
“…the AIFF League Committee is a committee empowered to make suggestions or decisions on league-related matters, which (when read in conjunction with the AIFF League Committee’s definition under Article 1.13 of the I-League Regulations) inherently require ratification or endorsement by the AIFF Executive Committee to acquire formal effect, particularly where such decisions impact the eligibility framework and regulatory integrity of the competition.
“Notably, in the present case, no such ratification of the League Committee Opinion/suggestion for permitting Mr. Barco’s re-registration was ever placed on record or effected.
“The League Committee has no independent adjudicatory or executive authority to render binding interpretations or grant approvals. Its jurisdiction is entirely recommendatory, and its outputs, at best, carry consultative value subject to further ratification by the competent bodies – in this case, the AIFF Executive Committee.
“It is submitted that the AIFF League Committee, therefore, did not purport to pass a conclusive order or decision, but merely flagged a possibility that was neither ratified nor finalized by any competent authority, including the AIFF Executive Committee.”
