CAF ‘unanimous’ support for Infantino disputed as ONLY FOUR officials reportedly backed FIFA president

The Confederation of African Football (CAF) has been accused of misrepresenting the position of its Executive Committee after publicly claiming that it had unanimously backed FIFA president Gianni Infantino.

According to a report challenging CAF’s official account, the organisation’s Executive Committee did not reach a unanimous position during its meeting on 6 August. Instead, only four officials are said to have openly expressed support for Infantino.

The four officials identified as having declared their backing were CAF president Patrice Motsepe, Royal Moroccan Football Federation president Fouzi Lekjaa, Mauritanian Football Federation president Ahmed Yahya and Djiboutian Football Federation president Souleiman Waberi.

The report argues that the position of the four officials should not necessarily be interpreted as representing the views of the entire Executive Committee.

It claims that several other members chose not to comment on the issue, while others, including Ivorian Football Federation president Idriss Diallo, are understood to support retaining Infantino within the Executive Committee but did not publicly declare their position during the meeting.

The account directly challenges CAF’s public description of the discussions as unanimous, suggesting that the governing body’s statement did not reflect the divisions or reservations that existed behind closed doors.

Several officials were reportedly surprised by the difference between CAF’s official communication and what they understood to have happened during the meeting.

However, the report stresses that silence from the majority of Executive Committee members should not automatically be interpreted as opposition to Infantino.

Instead, many officials are believed to be adopting a wait-and-see approach as the political situation surrounding the FIFA president develops.

Infantino continues to have significant support among African football leaders, with financial considerations understood to be one factor behind his strong position on the continent.

His leadership of FIFA has coincided with increased financial resources and investment opportunities for member associations, making his continued presidency attractive to some federation leaders.

The report also suggests that concerns over FIFA’s governance and ethics mechanisms could influence the positions of some officials.

With FIFA’s Ethics Committee retaining the power to investigate football administrators, some leaders may be reluctant to openly oppose a FIFA president who remains politically influential.

Nevertheless, the situation could change if a credible challenger emerges.

For now, many CAF officials appear unwilling to commit themselves publicly, preferring to assess the balance of power before taking a definitive position.

The disagreement over CAF’s description of the Executive Committee’s position also highlights the political tensions surrounding the relationship between FIFA and African football’s governing body.

While Infantino retains considerable influence in Africa, the reported absence of unanimous support suggests that the continent’s football leadership may not be as united behind him as CAF’s official statement indicated.

The coming months could therefore prove crucial, particularly if a serious challenger to Infantino emerges and forces African football leaders to choose sides.

For now, however, the majority of CAF Executive Committee members appear to be keeping their positions private, leaving the true extent of Infantino’s support in Africa open to question.