On Thursday, Sudanese side Al-Hilal delivered a scathing critique of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) over the crisis surrounding Moroccan club Renaissance Berkane’s player Hamza El Moussaoui, after a hearing by CAF’s Disciplinary Committee.
The club insists that Al-Mousawi should have been ineligible for Renaissance Berkane’s quarter-final against Al-Hilal, a match the Moroccan side won despite the player’s positive doping test.
Read also
The ideal Champions League line-up: Real Madrid completely absent... and Barcelona represented by a single player
FIFA awards ‘prize’ to referee of Barcelona v Atlético Madrid match
For the first time... FIFA hints at its stance on the Africa Cup of Nations final crisis
Al-Hilal said in its statement: “Al-Hilal Club expresses its deep concern and strongest condemnation of what transpired during the Disciplinary Committee hearing held today at the headquarters of the Confederation of African Football (CAF), in case number 23337, concerning the eligibility of player Hamza Al-Mousawi following a positive doping test result.”
The club added that the hearing was not a simple administrative error but a serious breach of due process that casts doubt on the independence, credibility and legitimacy of CAF’s disciplinary bodies, as well as the integrity of African football.
On the composition of the arbitration panel, the club added: “From the outset, the composition of the arbitration panel was flawed. The chair of the hearing, Mr Othman Keen, had previously been involved in the decision to lift the provisional suspension of the player in question—a decision that sparked the chain of events leading to this case—thereby creating a clear and undeniable conflict of interest. Despite our immediate objection, it later emerged that the other party had prior knowledge of the panel’s composition and had approved it at a meeting held without Al-Hilal’s presence.”
“Serious violations.”
The statement continued: “During the hearing, serious procedural violations occurred, as one member of the panel stated that he was unable to understand English, yet no adequate interpretation was provided. Our request to restate or clarify our submissions was also rejected, and our representatives were abruptly excluded whilst deliberations and voting were still in progress. More seriously, while our delegation was excluded, the opposing party’s lawyer was allowed to stay. The club’s representatives were repeatedly interrupted and prevented from presenting their case fairly.”
Al-Hilal added: “The proceedings lacked transparency, as key information was communicated informally—and without written documentation—to the club’s official legal representatives during the hearing. Most alarmingly, the club was told—without justification—to replace its legal team, a suggestion that is both unacceptable and suspicious, raising serious doubts about the fairness of the proceedings and the possibility that they were predetermined.”
Al-Hilal Club affirms that the hearing was fundamentally flawed, lacked independence and impartiality, and denied our right to defend ourselves and to be heard. The entire process, he argued, showed a systematic disregard for justice and transparency, and called into question CAF’s ability to deliver impartial justice.”
He concluded: “Such practices not only harm our club, but also undermine confidence in CAF’s governance and damage the reputation of African football as a whole. Al-Hilal Club will continue to take all necessary legal and regulatory measures to defend its rights and ensure full accountability for these serious violations.”