FIFA Ban: US Court Throws Out Siasia’s Appeal

An appeal against a FIFA ban filed by ex-Super Eagles coach, Samson Siasia has been dismissed by a United States Court of Appeal sitting in New York.

Recall that in August 2019, FIFA slammed a life ban from football-related activities on Siasia having found him “guilty of having accepted that he would receive bribes in relation to the manipulation of matches”. According to FIFA, the coach”s allegedly violated the federation’s code of ethics.

However, the ban was subsequently reduced to five years by the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS), with the accompanied 50,000 Swiss francs ($54,000) fine cancelled.

Siasia In August 2021, sued FIFA over the ban, saying the evidence was “grossly insufficient” and that the punishment violated his due process rights under the U.S. Constitution.

In a judgment delivered by a three-member panel on Thursday, the court ruled that Siasia failed to establish why a court in New York had jurisdiction over the case.

It added that the Nigerian failed to establish, in his suit, that FIFA, a body based in Switzerland, was “essentially at home” in New York.

The court also said although Siasia, who is based in the US, was banned from using a coaching licence issued by US soccer, his argument in that regard was not effective and barely supported by “conclusory statements.”

The ruling also affirmed the decision of a New York district court that had earlier dismissed the case on December 29, 2021.

“Upon consideration, it is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed that the order of the district court entered on December 29, 2021 is affirmed,” the court statement reads.

“This case asks us to decide whether the district court properly dismissed Appellant Siasia’s 5 Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over Appellee Fédération Internationale de Football 6 Association (“FIFA”), a Swiss entity. See Siasia v. Fédération Internationale de Football 7 Association, No. 21 Civ. 6516 (AKH), 2021 WL 5042974, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 2021).

“We 8 assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues on 9 appeal, which we reference only as necessary to explain our decision.

“The record does not support the finding that Siasia made a prima facie showing of personal 6 jurisdiction under either theory. Siasia’s support for general jurisdiction relies on generalized 7 claims and poorly supported speculations of future activity that plainly do not suffice to render 8 FIFA ‘essentially at home’ in New York.”