Former Nairobi Governor Mike Mbuvi Sonko has taken a bold step in contesting Kenya’s narrow and heartbreaking exit from the African Nations Championship (CHAN) quarter-finals. In a formal petition lodged with the Confederation of African Football (CAF) under Article 43 of its statutes, Sonko contends that Harambee Stars were unfairly treated by match officials, who allegedly disallowed two crucial Kenyan goals without due consultation or VAR review
Sonko’s legal team, led by Arnold Oginga, alleges that the match officials acted with outright bias, unlawfully disallowing two legitimate goals by Kenya. These decisions were made without consulting team captains, coaches, or using VAR and by doing so, the officials violated the spirit of sportsmanship, loyalty, integrity, and ethics
The petition invokes the CAF Code, noting that “match officials” extend beyond on-field referees to include commissioners, inspectors, and other appointed personnel, implying a collective responsibility for the alleged officiating errors
Remedies Sought
Sonko’s petition includes two primary demands:
- Nullification of the officials’ decision to disallow the goals and the subsequent penalty shootout result.
- Awarding the match to Kenya outright or, if that’s not feasible, ordering a full replay of the quarter-final encounter
Additionally, he urges CAF to reprimand the match officials for breaching the organization’s Code of Conduct and statutes
Legal Context & Tournament Fallout
Kenya’s dramatic exit came after a 1–1 draw through regular and extra time, culminating in a heart-stopping 4–3 defeat in the penalty shootout to Madagascar at Kasarani Stadium
Under CAF’s Article 43, decisions grounded in the referee’s on-field “matters of fact” typically cannot be appealed. These include judgment calls and fouls areas that are considered final and inviolable by the statutes. However, Sonko’s petition challenges this framework, proposing that violations of procedure or ethical conduct may warrant review, especially when VAR protocols and consultation were allegedly ignored.
The petition was submitted within the 48-hour window required for such appeals and has been served to CAF, the Football Kenya Federation (FKF), and the Madagascar delegation. In a strategic move, Sonko is also seeking interim measures to suspend the semi-final scheduled for August 26, pending CAF’s determination
What’s Next
CAF will now consider whether this complaint qualifies as one of undue procedural handling, possibly differentiating it from non-appealable refereeing judgments. If accepted, it could set a precedent for how future officiating disputes—especially those involving VAR—are treated within African football.
Conclusion
This high-profile appeal underscores major issues facing modern tournaments that; is VAR integrity and its inconsistent application, the limits of appealing referee decisions, even when they may betray procedural lapses and the growing public scrutiny over accountability in CAF-sanctioned matches. Regardless of the outcome, Sonko’s move has reignited debate over transparency, fairness, and the role of technology in African football.
