The autonomy of sport in Africa: A quest for decolonisation

Days before the Africa Cup of Nations kicked off in Cameroon in 2022, Zambia, a country that had not qualified for the tournament, was on standby just in case FIFA followed through on its threat to ban Zimbabwe after the country's government had suspended the board of the national football association.  The government had suspended the board of the Zimbabwe Football Association (ZIFA) in November 2021, citing allegations of corruption, sexual harassment of female referees, and mismanagement of funds. 

At the time of the cup, three football member associations in the continent were at loggerheads with their local governments due to alleged corruption and mismanagement within the associations. Among them was Chad which was already serving a FIFA-imposed ban, and once Zimbabwe was eliminated at the group stage, FIFA followed through on their threat and banned Zimbabwe alongside Kenya. 

While these three member associations come from different regions in the continent (Chad is located in Northern Africa, Kenya is an East African country and Zimbabwe shares its southern border with South Africa) and have different sports governance frameworks and different socio-political landscapes, FIFA’s approach to the governance issues was a blanket ban intended to uphold the so-called autonomy of sport. 

Granted, this principle is not solely FIFA’s precept; it is also ingrained in the Olympic Charter where the IOC advocates that its affiliated National Olympic Committees (NOC) operate without undue interference lest they too attract a ban, as was the case with the Ghana Olympic Committee in 2011. 

Ghana’s national legislation gave the government the power to select the leaders in the Olympic committee, a tenet that goes against the IOC’s stipulations on autonomous member associations. Ceding to the IOC’s demands, Ghana amended their legislation to align with IOC’s regulation which meant that the suspension, imposed months before the 2012 Olympics in London, was lifted.

In the European context, the concept of autonomy of sport has been extensively researched and deliberated, so much so that the European Union integrates this principle within its broader policies and laws on sport. 

The rationale for political autonomy by bodies such as FIFA and IOC is often pegged on sports’ ability to transcend political interests and promote peace. The United Nations has also recognised this potential, formally endorsing sports as a vehicle for promoting education, health, development, and peace during its 69th regular session. 

Needless to say, this principle has – rightly so –  been criticised as a red herring designed to distract from the corruption, lack of transparency and accountability by sporting federations. Yet, despite the contentious nature of the autonomy of sport in the European context, both custodians and critics of this principle engage in a substantive and well-grounded discourse.

The discourse is grounded in upholding the structure of the European sports model and legal framework, particularly the concept of "specificity of sport" recognised by the EU. Supporters argue that autonomy is crucial for preserving sport's cultural and social values, protecting it from political interference, and maintaining its role in promoting social cohesion and public health. Critics acknowledge these points but contend that unchecked autonomy can lead to governance issues. This tension reflects a robust and rigorous understanding of sports governance in the European context, where the principle of autonomy, though contested, has a clear rationale and legal basis.

However, in the context of Africa, the underpinnings and rationale for sporting autonomy cannot be separated from the continent’s colonial history. 

The IOC pushed for autonomous sporting associations in Africa

In 1949, the provision of autonomous sporting associations in Africa was advocated by the IOC, as evidenced by its plea to the French Union in Africa to establish autonomous NOCs. This push coincided with the modification of Rule 39 of the Olympic Charter, which allowed for the creation of NOCs in overseas territories. The IOC's intentions were twofold: to mitigate the rise of any major sporting events that would rival the Olympic Games and to maintain colonial control of sports governance in the continent.

Even though the Olympic Movement advocated for the separation of politics from sport, this push for autonomy paradoxically happened when colonial imposition was still rife in Africa and when most NOCs that gained legitimacy by the IOC were still under colonial control. 

Nevertheless, the quest for autonomous sporting associations was not just the desire of Avery Brundage, the fifth IOC president. It was also a reflection of the aspirations of African nations themselves, who sought to assert their independence and identity through the establishment of self-governing sports bodies. 

This was especially the case in football where the establishment of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) was driven by the desire to shift the governance of football from colonial-based control of member associations to a unified body that would champion the demands and interests of solely independent African nations. 

Prior to CAF's establishment, the governance of football was under the auspices of dominant colonial powers of the French and the British, and CAF’s existence was meant to challenge the football leagues and competitions which were organised by colonial administrators and often aimed at serving the European expatriate communities in their respective countries. 

To be a member of CAF, a country had to have gained political emancipation. For these reasons, CAF was among the first institutions - even beyond sport - in Africa to champion Pan-African ideals and in doing so embodied a stronger stance than other international sports governing bodies against South Africa’s apartheid policies. CAF also successfully negotiated more slots for African nations at the World Cup.

As such, the quest for self-governance at the levels of sport and state was hardly separate for African nation-states. Football especially was a field where anti-colonial sentiments brewed and nationalist sentiments bloomed.

In 1954 Algeria notoriously used football as a platform for political mobilisation and resistance, and football became a powerful symbol of Algerian identity and defiance, especially during its struggle for independence. The formation of the FLN (Front de Libération Nationale) football club was especially significant as it represented a united front against colonial rule. 

Clubs established under French influence, like the Mouloudia Club of Algiers, became symbols of defiance, while matches and songs conveyed revolutionary messages, embodying the collective yearning for freedom from oppression. Consequently, stadiums transformed into sites of national symbolism and battlegrounds for control between the emerging national government and remaining colonial influences during the decolonisation process. 

The lingering colonial legacies in African sports governance

The nationalisation of sport and the emergence of African sports administrators mirrored the colonial structures, systems and mindsets that ought to have been dismantled or changed to be more attuned to the realities of post-colonial states. 

For instance, the legal frameworks for sports governance adopted by African states mirror the colonial legacies imparted by different European powers.

In Anglophone countries, the governance model is characterised by a more decentralised approach that stems from British legal traditions, emphasising voluntary association and self-regulation. 

Conversely, Francophone African countries often exhibit a more centralised and state-integrated model for sports governance influenced by French civil law traditions and involving greater government oversight and control. These Francophone legal frameworks mandate that sports federations act not only as private entities but also as implementers of public policy, which can lead to frequent clashes with FIFA's and IOC's policies on non-interference. 

Historically, Francophone member associations that have faced suspensions from FIFA for government interference are Benin, Cameroon, Chad, and Mali. 

However, the challenges with FIFA's non-interference policies are not exclusive to Francophone African countries. Anglophone African nations, despite their more decentralised approach to sports governance, have also frequently found themselves at odds with FIFA over issues of government involvement. 

Countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Sierra Leone have all faced FIFA suspensions or threats of suspension due to perceived government interference.

As part of the decolonisation process, many African countries, including Senegal, established ministries of sports. These government bodies were created to transition sports governance away from colonial authorities and into the hands of newly independent states.

They were tasked with multiple objectives: centralising sports administration at the national level, fostering sports development across the country, enhancing the competitiveness of national teams and athletes, and leveraging sports as a means to strengthen national identity and promote culture both domestically and internationally.

These ministries continue to play significant roles in sports governance and can sometimes find themselves at odds with football federations or NOCs. 

For instance, in 2022, when FIFA suspended Kenya, it was in response to actions taken by the country's ministry of sport. The ministry had raised concerns about alleged embezzlement of state funds by Nick Mwendwa, the head of the Football Kenya Federation (FKF). Subsequently, the ministry dissolved the federation and appointed a "caretaker committee." It also attempted to engage with FIFA to establish a normalisation committee to oversee a leadership transition. However, FIFA responded by suspending Kenya and calling for the reinstatement of the FKF.

In Zimbabwe, the country did not cede to FIFA’s demands of reinstating the Zimbabwe Football Association (ZIFA), resulting in an 18-month ban which stymied any chance of Zimbabwe’s participation in the 2023 African Cup of Nations (AFCON) and the women's AFCON tournament. At the helm of this bold decision was Zimbabwe’s sports minister Kirsty Coventry, who asserted that “the way in which our football was running was heavily dependent on what the administrators wanted and was only for their benefit.” 

The pitfalls of misguided autonomy

While the advocacy for autonomous sports organisations in Europe can be traced back to the need to mitigate the political influence of the Soviet Union, which was perceived as increasingly intervening in sports to advance its own geopolitical interests during the Cold War era, Africa’s context illustrates that sporting autonomy was negotiated to either maintain colonial rule, to subvert it and/or to promote nationalist sentiments. This is in contrast to the rationales proposed by the UN and most international sports governing bodies. 

The nationalist sentiments that bloomed in sports and the subsequently established sports governing bodies and ministries of sports effectively played their role in negotiating political independence both outside and within sports. According to the political philosophers Edward Said and Frantz Fanon, anti-colonial nationalism was effective in subverting colonial domination but has its downfall which is manifested in the contemporary sports governance frameworks in various African nations.

Since the custodians of sports governance in Africa such as the leaders in CAF adopted the same rationales of national superiority as the former European colonisers, their reasons to promote sport were not based on what sport can actually offer such as the promotion of health, education and wellbeing. They used it mainly to portray a supposedly unified national front against their oppressors and once this need was met, the focus on maintaining power often supplanted the broader goals of sports development in their respective nations.

In a sharp critique of the downfalls of anti-colonial nationalism Frantz Fanon argued that African leaders “step into the shoes of the former European settlement: doctors, lawyers, traders, commercial travellers, general agents, and transport agents” and their priorities lay in appeasing former colonisers rather than addressing the needs and aspirations of their own people.

Export of players is more important than developing sports generally
In contemporary times, this is evident in the African football market where clubs, academies, and federations prioritise the development of sport for the sake of exporting human capital to Europe. This issue is particularly acute in the West African football market, where, according to the UN, over 15,000 children from West Africa are trafficked annually under the guise of pursuing football careers. 

What’s more, while mainstream media is awash with the successes of footballers such as Amad Diallo, Didier Drogba or André Onana, academic research indicates that these players are often the exceptions rather than the rule. 

In Poland for example, about a hundred West African footballers play in the lower divisions, facing low wages, poor living conditions, and limited prospects for advancement. Even after successful careers abroad, more research shows that the lives of footballers from Africa are set for precarious times post-football due to inadequate preparation for post-playing careers.

Tone-deaf expectations of sporting infrastructure

Furthermore, Fanon highlights how the infrastructure in post-colonial nations often served the interests of the former colonisers. In sports, this legacy lingers and is evident in the 17 African countries that have been forced to host their 2026 FIFA World Cup qualifiers away from home due to inadequate facilities that do not meet the so-called FIFA/ CAF standards. 

Specifically, countries like Benin, Congo, and Kenya have faced bans from using their home stadiums because the facilities are below the required standard. 

However, juxtaposing these CAF expectations to the socio-economic realities of Benin for example, illustrates the tone-deaf nature of these impositions. The economic profile of Benin shows a country striving to improve through international aid and minimal private foreign investment, primarily in agriculture, which employs about 80 per cent of the population.

Despite significant economic challenges, as Benin is among the 30 poorest countries globally, the imposition of stringent international standards often fails to acknowledge the financial and infrastructural constraints these countries face. How will it benefit Benin to own a world-class stadium when its people forage for food? Furthermore, how will a world-class stadium confer the health benefits that football and other sports have to offer? 

With FIFA offering Africa nine guaranteed slots in the 2026 World Cup, the drive to meet international sports standards and build large-scale sports infrastructure like world-class stadiums might not align with immediate national priorities or public welfare in most African countries. Instead, it represents an externally imposed goal that doesn't necessarily serve the broader needs of the population. 

In the case of sporting bodies in Africa, the rationale against the “politicisation of sport” falters under scrutiny, especially with the historical evidence of how African nation-states employed sport as a platform for political expression and mobilisation. 

Furthermore, the imposition of the principle of autonomy of sport by the IOC and FIFA in the continent seems less like a genuine effort to protect the integrity of sport and more like a means to maintain control over the governance of sport in a way that reeks of neocolonial control. 

The tone-deaf infrastructural expectations and the lack of regard for legal frameworks in African states by international sports governing bodies all point to a continuation of control dynamics that echo the colonial era and exemplify cultural imperialism where these bodies assume their modus operandi are universally applicable.

Decolonising sport: A path forward

So what gives? There is no doubt that sport can serve Africa for Africans. However, to confer the benefits of health, education and promotion of peace that sport can offer to Africa, custodians of sport in the continent ought to rethink the role that the international sports governing bodies and their affiliates play in their nations and strategise on decentering from these bodies.

Undeniably, the power which these bodies have lies in the financial capital they bring to the table, yet this should not overshadow the sovereignty and the specific needs of African individuals. 

Moreover, the athletes who have already gained enough capital to establish institutions such as academies ought to work with intellectuals to change the mindset that reveres foreign models as inherently superior. These collaborations should extend to policy advocacy, where athletes and scholars work together to influence sports legislation and funding priorities that support local development over adherence to international expectations. This approach prioritises a bottom-up approach where athletes and individuals are prioritised over institutions.

On an institutional front, African nations and their sports custodians (such as the ministries of sport) could leverage their collective power to renegotiate terms that are more equitable and less prescriptive. 

If African states are always disgruntled by football federations or NOCs embezzling state funds while being protected by FIFA and/or IOC, forming regional coalitions and alliances and hosting sporting events without the ratifications of these international sports governing bodies could be a significant step forward. 

The existence of the African Union Sport Council and the already established regional divisions provides a structured platform and a place to begin such initiatives. Moreover, the existence of such events could also challenge the notion that international bodies are necessary for legitimacy and high-quality event management.

The decolonisation of sports structures in African nations is a long game. The arduous mental and practical journey that lies in decolonising the mindsets and structures which have set up Africa and Africans for failure in the global sports environment, should not be the course on which the cause dies. It will be difficult before it becomes easier but unless we begin, the journey will remain perpetually daunting.