TAS hearing to examine Senegal appeal over 2025 Africa Cup of Nations final

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS) will hear Senegal’s appeal in Lausanne on Thursday against the Confederation of African Football (CAF) Appeals Committee’s decision over the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations final between Morocco and Senegal.

The Senegalese Football Federation is challenging the ruling that declared Senegal 3-0 losers and awarded the title to Morocco after events during the match. Speaking exclusively to Africafoot, sports litigation expert Khalil Boubhi, a member of the Moroccan Sports Arbitration Chamber, outlined the legal arguments he believes support the Royal Moroccan Football Federation (FRMF) and CAF.

Senegal appeal described as premature

Boubhi argues that Senegal’s appeal may be inadmissible because it was lodged after the operative part of the Appeals Committee’s decision but before the written reasons were issued.

The decision allowed the parties 10 days to request the reasons in writing. According to Boubhi, Senegal instead went directly to the TAS and asked for the time limits to be suspended until the reasoned decision was received. He cited TAS case 2012/A/2961, involving Khalid Adnane, Al Faisaly and FIFA, as support for his view that the appeal was premature.

He also rejected Senegal’s claim that its defence rights had been breached during the CAF appeal process. Senegal had previously stated in an official release that it accepted the disciplinary sanctions imposed by the CAF Disciplinary Committee and did not intend to challenge them.

Boubhi said the appeal had been brought by the FRMF, while Senegal had been invited to participate by video conference via Zoom primarily to provide explanations and answer questions. He therefore considers the complaint legally unfounded.

Senegal’s challenge to the competence and impartiality of the Appeals Committee was also questioned. Boubhi said the federation had not used the recusal procedure set out in Article 20 of the CAF Disciplinary Code. He added that there was no evidence that Moez Ben Taher Nasri, president of the Tunisian Football Federation, had a personal interest or conflict of interest in the case.

Article 82 at the centre of the dispute

On the substance of the case, Boubhi focused on the Senegalese players’ departure from the pitch during the final at Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium in Rabat.

He said Article 82 of the Africa Cup of Nations regulations clearly states that a team which withdraws, refuses to play or leaves the field before the end of normal time without the referee’s authorisation or agreement is deemed to have lost and may be excluded from the competition.

Boubhi rejected the argument that the players’ return and the resumption of the match removed the legal consequences of leaving the pitch. In his view, the departure, reportedly following a decision by the coach towards the dressing rooms, was an established material fact and was not erased by what happened later.

He also cited FIFA precedents showing that incidents during matches can be reviewed in exceptional circumstances. These included the decision to replay Senegal’s 2016 match against South Africa after referee Joseph Lamptey was found to have manipulated events, and the 2005 Uzbekistan-Bahrain match, which was annulled and replayed after a serious technical error by referee Toshimitsu Yoshida.

No double punishment, says expert

Boubhi disputed Senegal’s claim that it had been punished twice: first through individual disciplinary sanctions and then by being awarded a 3-0 defeat.

He said the principle of ne bis in idem did not apply because the two measures arose from separate procedures. The individual sanctions were based on official reports, while the match forfeiture followed the formal protest submitted by the FRMF under the competition regulations.

He also described the CAF Appeals Committee’s sanction as proportionate to the conduct of the Senegalese coach, players and supporters, arguing that the incidents damaged sporting integrity, discipline and fair play.

The expert said the trophy, medals and financial prize ultimately depended on the TAS ruling. Under Articles 5 and 6, those items remain CAF property and are presented to the competition’s winner. If Senegal’s appeal is rejected, he said CAF would have to request their return before arranging official ceremonies to award them to Morocco.

The TAS will determine the final legal consequences of the dispute.