SAFA criticised over decision to fund Danny Jordaan’s legal defence

The South African Football Association (SAFA) has been criticised for agreeing to pay the legal costs of its president Danny Jordaan, who is facing allegations of theft, fraud and corruption.

Football legend Innocent Mayoyo said Jordaan should deal with the case in his personal capacity and argued that he ought to step aside while the proceedings continue.

“He is supposed to face his predicament in his individual capacity,” Mayoyo told KickOff.

“If the Association were properly structured, Jordaan should ‘step aside.’ It is the right thing to do for anyone facing legal charges until the accused is cleared. Yes, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but there should also be measures to prevent interference with investigations.”

The decision was formally approved by SAFA’s National Executive Committee (NEC), which resolved to cover all legal expenses incurred by Jordaan and Chief Financial Officer Gronie Hluyo. The agreement also includes legal costs already accumulated in connection with the case.

SAFA said it was not the complainant and had not laid criminal charges with law enforcement authorities. The association maintains that the prosecution is being pursued by “disgruntled former NEC members and employees” acting in their individual capacities.

The case follows a Hawks investigation into the alleged misuse of R1.3 million in SAFA funds between 2014 and 2018.

According to the state, the money was allegedly used without authorisation for Jordaan’s personal benefit. The spending is said to have included private security services and the services of a public relations company appointed to manage his image.

SAFA has also outlined several other steps in response to the legal proceedings. It plans to submit a written statement to the court denying wrongdoing by its officials, appoint senior legal counsel to monitor the trial and begin civil proceedings against people it believes have defamed the organisation.

The decision to use association funds for the legal defence has led to public criticism and opposition from some SAFA members.

Those critics argue that paying for personal criminal defences diverts money that should instead be directed towards the development of grassroots football.

SAFA’s decision comes as Jordaan and Hluyo remain involved in the ongoing court case, while the association continues to reject the allegations against its officials.