Former Nairobi Governor Mike Mbuvi Sonko has filed a formal complaint with the continental sports tribunal, accusing match officials of biased refereeing against Kenya during its CHAN tie against Madagascar last Friday..

In the court filing, Sonko seeks to have the game forfeited on the basis that Kenya’s tournament exit was occasioned by faulty refereeing. Sonko is also seeking to suspend today’s semi-final between Sudan and Madagascar pending a determination of his case. He further wants CAF to order a replay of the quarter-final clash.

In his application, Sonko states:

“That the decision to disallow the two (2) goals scored by Kenya be SUSPENDED pending the hearing and determination of the instant complaint. That the results of the penalty shoot-out in the game between KENYA AND MADAGASCAR be SUSPENDED pending the hearing and determination of the instant complaint.”

Sonko alleges that match officials unfairly disallowed two Kenyan goals and failed to review the decisions using VAR [Video Assistant Referee] or consult relevant parties, including team captains, coaches, and other officials. He further claims that the referees displayed bias in favour of Madagascar, to Kenya’s detriment.

The filing before the CAF Disciplinary Board lists the match officials as the first respondents, with the Football Kenya Federation (FKF), Madagascar’s national team, and the Fédération Malagasy de Football named as interested parties.

Represented by Wanyanga and Company Advocates, Sonko argues that unless interim measures under Article 12 of the CAF Statutes and Regulations are granted, his complaint will be rendered moot, denying him a fair hearing.

His application also cites CAF’s code, which defines match officials as referees, assistant referees, the fourth referee, match commissioner, referee inspector, security officer, general coordinator, and any other persons appointed by CAF or FIFA in connection with a match. The petition also demands that the referee and other match officials who officiated the match be reprimanded for breaching CAF’s Code of Conduct and Statutes.

Sonko contends that the officials collectively denied Kenya a chance to reach the semi-finals through what he calls wrongful officiating and a blatant disregard for the rules, and he is seeking justice for the national team.

However, Sonko’s appeal has slim chances of success under current laws.

Article 43 of the CAF Statutes states: “The decisions taken by the referee on the ground during the match on matters of fact shall not be subject to protests in any case.”

This is in accordance with FIFA’s stance that on-field factual decisions by the referee like penalty, disallowed goal, or other on-field decisions are not subject to protest.

CAF clarifies that appeals are warranted only in the case of, for example, administrative errors, ineligible player use, or infractions against competition laws, all of which are addressed through due process within given time limits. Appeals based on issues of referee personal discretion or judgment alone are simply prohibited.

Precedents within CAF and FIFA support this limitation, as could be seen from cases where appeals based on refereeing decisions alone are systematically denied.

Only in exceptional situations, such as match abandonment or safety concerns, has CAF ever ordered a replay, as happened once in a CAF Champions League second-leg match.

Sonko’s appeal thus has no merit considering existing regulations.

CAF has noted that unless the former governor can provide evidence of non-factual violations, such as the use of ineligible players or procedural illegality, the organization would not nullify the results, award the game to Kenya, or order a replay.

Official disciplinary action remains on the cards, but not as a method for overturning the match outcome.