When majority of the Football Kenya Federation (FKF) National Executive Committee (NEC) members signed a resolution suspending president Hussein Mohammed , Acting General Secretary Dennis Gicheru, and nominated NEC member Abdullahi Yussuf Ibrahim on April 24 , they cited Article 87 of the FKF Constitution as the basis of their decision.
“Article 87 of the FKF Constitution mandates the National Executive Committee shall have the power to decide on all cases of force majeure and all matters not provided for in the Constitution, such decisions to be made according to right and justice and the doctrine of necessity,” read part of the statement issued by nine of the 14 NEC members.
The NEC members, led by deputy president McDonald Mariga justified their action by pointing to the alleged Sh42 million insurance fraud for 2024 African Nations Championship (Chan), conflict of interest, and serious breaches of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act 2015 and the Public Finance Management Act.
Since Fifa only listed Articles 38, 40 and 41 of the FKF Constitution as the provisions, it will jointly with CAF, examine in its assessment of whether the ouster of the three officials was lawful, sports lawyer Charles Njenga said the NEC members must demonstrate that a ‘force majeure’ situation existed to warrant their actions as provided for under Article 87 of the FKF Constitution.
Fifa on Sunday informed the NEC members of its intention to get to the bottom of the matter and requested them to submit the documents they relied on in making the decision by May 1.
“Fifa’s letter is based on a premise that the removal (of the three officials) was based on article 41, which provides for a general procedure for removal of a person or body,” Njenga explained.
“It is for NEC then to show that this was not a removal under that provision but a force majeure situation which did not require this procedure and probably the hearing shall be at a later stage,” Njenga, who is chairman of Githurai All Stars Football Club, said.
Force Majeure is an extraordinary or unforeseen circumstance that prevents someone from doing or completing something that they agreed to do.
Njenga noted that the constitution does not categorise force majeure and that its interpretation varies on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific circumstances at hand.
Football Kenya Federation (FKF) President Hussein Mohammed.
Photo credit: Lucy Wanjiru | Nation Media Group
According to the lawyer, examples of force majeure that could justify Hussein’s removal from office include criminal conviction and subsequent imprisonment, a critical illness that renders him incapable of performing his duties, or a situation where he is held hostage and cannot be accounted for.
“Ultimately, these documents (that NEC members will submit to Fifa and CAF regarding the removal of the three officials) have to show that there was an instance of force majeure where the president was no longer tenable, the office was not functioning and there was a real threat to the progression of the game in Kenya and the only practical action that would have been efficient and available in that circumstance was the provisional removal of the president,” the Githurai All Stars chairman observed.
In examining the articles 38, 40 and 41 of the FKF Constitution, Fifa said it will seek to establish if the meeting at which the suspension resolution was passed was convened properly, whether the required quorum and voting threshold were met, and if the affected officials were given their right to be heard before the resolution was adopted.
In dismissing the resolutions by NEC on Saturday, Hussein cited Article 38 (2), which of the FKF Constitution which states that the federation’s president shall convene NEC meetings.
The clause further provides that where at least 50 percent of the NEC request for a meeting, the president must convene it within 21 days, failure to which the members may convene the meeting themselves.
“Of course NEC has powers to provisionally suspend, it is explicit in the constitution. But as to whether there was basis and whether that basis then exists in Article 87 or 41 (of the FKF Constitution) is a debate that will be purely based on the facts unveiled,” Njenga stated.
Following the communication from Fifa, the NEC members released a statement on Sunday where they promised to furnish the two football governing bodies with all the documents they relied on in their action within the stipulated time.
They added that the affected officials will be accorded their rights to be heard in strict adherence to FKF Statutes and the provisions of the Kenyan Constitution. Njenga noted that since the NEC based their decision of force majeure, they don’t need to accord the trio a hearing opportunity.
“If you are basing your decision on force majeure, you don’t have to demonstrate a hearing. But if you are basis your decision on Article 41 (of the FKF Constitution) on removal, then you have to follow the procedure there which requires you to frame allegations, serve them, give time to respond, hearing them, make a decision then vote on the question of whether or not they should be provisionally dismissed,” he explained.
On Monday, the Sports Disputes Tribunal (SDT) temporarily stopped the implementation of all the resolutions by the NEC until a petition filed by one Ahmed Abdi Mohammed is heard and determined.
SDT Deputy Chairperson Hon. Allan Mola certified the matter as urgent and directed that the statement of claim and the notice of motion application be filed by May 4. The matter is scheduled for virtual mention on May 5 at 2:30pm. The petition will be heard by a panel comprising Mola, Hon. Luke Wamugunda and Hon. Victor Omwebu.
“The Tribunal grants a temporary order of injunction restraining the respondents, whether by themselves, their officials, agents, servants or any persons acting under their authority, from affecting the entire Resolutions as passed on 24th April 2026 until the Mention date stated at Order 6 here below,” read part of the ruling by Mola.
