Power in modern football does not stop at the touchline. It sits in boardrooms, shapes global narratives, and influences politics across continents. That reality is now under unprecedented legal scrutiny.
A coalition of Palestinian footballers, clubs and advocacy organizations has formally submitted a 120-page complaint to the International Criminal Court, targeting two of the most powerful figures in world sport: Gianni Infantino, president of FIFA, and Aleksander Čeferin, president of UEFA.
The allegation is historic. It accuses both men of aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with Israeli settlement clubs operating in occupied Palestinian territory. For the first time, the leadership of global football is being asked to answer not in a sporting tribunal — but before an international criminal court.
From Stadium Governance to International Criminal Law
FIFA and UEFA are often described as sports organizations. In reality, they operate more like global regulators. Their statutes function as binding law within the football ecosystem, and their decisions can isolate nations from the world’s most popular sport.
With roughly five billion fans worldwide, football is unmatched in cultural reach. That scale makes its governing bodies uniquely influential — and uniquely vulnerable to legal and ethical scrutiny.
The complaint centers on the continued participation of Israeli settlement-based clubs in competitions overseen by the Israel Football Association (IFA), which operates under FIFA and UEFA structures.
Critics argue that by allowing these clubs to compete, FIFA and UEFA are effectively legitimizing settlements considered unlawful under international law.
The Settlement Issue and FIFA’s Own Rules
Article 64(2) of FIFA’s statutes prohibits member associations from organizing matches on the territory of another member association without consent.
The West Bank is internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory. The complaint argues that clubs based in Israeli settlements there are operating on land that does not fall under Israel’s sovereign jurisdiction in the eyes of international law.
In 2024, the International Court of Justice reaffirmed that Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory are unlawful. Similarly, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling on Israel to cease settlement activity and evacuate settlers.
The ICC complaint contends that continued recognition of these clubs contributes to the normalization of settlement expansion — a violation outlined in the Rome Statute, the legal foundation of the ICC.
Specifically, the filing references:
-
Article 8(2)(b)(viii): prohibiting the transfer of civilian populations into occupied territory.
-
Article 7(1)(j): defining apartheid as a crime against humanity.
Why Infantino and Čeferin Are Personally Named
The ICC cannot prosecute institutions such as FIFA or UEFA directly. It prosecutes individuals responsible for policies that may contribute to international crimes.
The complaint alleges that both Infantino and Čeferin have been repeatedly informed about the legal concerns surrounding settlement clubs but failed to act. By continuing to permit the Israel Football Association’s structure to include those clubs, the filing argues, they have knowingly enabled conduct contrary to international law.
This approach marks a significant shift: instead of targeting governments alone, activists are now scrutinizing corporate and sporting leadership at the highest levels.
The Russia Comparison
The controversy also raises questions of consistency.
In 2022, FIFA suspended Russia from international competition following its invasion of Ukraine. After Russia’s 2014 occupation of Crimea, UEFA barred Crimean clubs from participating in the Russian league structure.
Infantino has publicly stated that banning Israeli teams would represent “a defeat” and has expressed opposition to excluding countries from football because of political actions.
Critics, however, argue that precedent already exists — and that neutrality has not been applied uniformly.
The Broader Context: “Athleticide” in Gaza
The complaint situates the settlement issue within a broader pattern of destruction affecting Palestinian sport.
According to figures cited in the filing:
-
1,007 Palestinian sportspeople have been killed.
-
184 sports facilities have been destroyed.
-
81 facilities have been damaged.
While these actions are not attributed directly to the Israel Football Association, advocates argue that the global football system’s acceptance of settlement-based clubs contributes to the normalization of occupation policies affecting all aspects of Palestinian life — including sport.
What Happens Next?
The Office of the Prosecutor at the ICC will now conduct a preliminary examination to assess:
-
Jurisdiction
-
Admissibility
-
Whether proceeding serves the interests of justice
The Prosecutor may decide not to open a full investigation. If an investigation proceeds, it could involve evidence collection and, potentially, the issuance of summonses or arrest warrants.
Such a development would represent an extraordinary moment in sports governance history.
The End of “Political Neutrality”?
For decades, global sporting bodies have defended controversial decisions under the banner of political neutrality. But neutrality itself can become political when rules are applied unevenly.
FIFA and UEFA oversee an industry worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Their competitions shape national identity, global branding, and diplomatic relationships. When they act — or refuse to act — the consequences extend far beyond football.
This complaint forces a difficult question onto the global stage:
Are sports leaders merely administrators of games, or are they accountable actors within international law?
The answer may ultimately come not from a stadium or a congress vote — but from judges in The Hague.
