The Nairobi United vs Gor Mahia abandoned match verdict has exposed a federation increasingly comfortable operating outside its own legal framework.

It has also lifted the lid on why for more than 10 years successive regimes of the federation has been indifferent to comply with regulations and requirement set by world football governing body, Fifa.

Football Kenya Federation (FKF), since the days of Mohammed Hatimy, Sam Nyamweya, Nick Mwendwa and now Hussein Mohammed have never committed to the Fifa Circular No.1424 of May 30, 2014. This is why match-fixing is rampant and has taken a firm grip on the Kenya game. Remember the story of Zoo Kericho? Fifa had to step in to relegate them.

The truth is, Gor Mahia, led by a lawyer, Ambrose Rachier, has exploited this legal and administrative gaps to thrive in impunity that stretches its tentacles to mainstream media newsrooms. The publicity the team is given is deliberate and designed to fool the football fraternity that the game is on the upswing. It appears so until to you ask yourself why Gor Mahia players who leave the club for European teams never last more than six months. Their contracts are terminated and they dispatched “back to sender.”

The players are beneficiaries of match-fixing. Once out of the club, they cannot even kick a ball. Where matches are won by match-fixing, the losers are players because they ride on deception. The national team suffers too.

Not a single Gor Mahia has ever thrived in Europe. On the flipside, players from Tusker FC, Bandari, AFC Leopards, Chemilil Sugar FC and Kakamega Homeboyz have had successful stints in Europe.

n the Nairobi United vs Gor Mahia saga, the FKF disciplinary committee summoned the involved parties without procedural clarity, failed to furnish charges and evidence and ultimately returned the matter to the Leagues and Competitions Committee (LCC) – an entity with no jurisdiction over disciplinary issues.

The Peter Kamau Kass Kass-led Leagues and Competitions Committee’s mandate is purely administrative and regulatory, not judicial. On realising they had been unfairly put to their defence, one of the parties in the matter asked whether it was an investigatory sitting or the commencement of a full hearing.

Under the FKF regulatory framework, the disciplinary committee cannot simultaneously act as investigator and adjudicator. The principles of natural justice demand institutional separation of mandate between investigation, prosecution and determination.

When it became apparent that the process had effectively morphed into a substantive hearing, the aggrieved party demanded a charge sheet, witness statements and adequate time to prepare a defence.

Sincerely, that demand is not optional or at the discretion of the adjudicators; it’s legally any accused party’s entitlement.

Providing an accused party with particulars of charges and evidence is a minimum procedural requirement in disciplinary proceedings. Failure to do so renders the process fundamentally flawed and exposes the entire matter to collapse on appeal or judicial review.

But this procedural failure is only a symptom. Beneath it, lies a deeper constitutional crisis that the FKF National Executive Committee (NEC) appears either unwilling or unable to confront.

In the name of reforms, the current administration crossed a critical redline: the wholesale overhaul of FKF’s judicial bodies left behind by the immediate former regime led by Nick Mwendwa.

That particular decision was not reform. It was a fundamental legal error. It is like a government coming to power in Kenya and sending all judges and magistrates home, with total disregard to the need for continuity, institutional memory and established legal processes.

The FKF judicial bodies are designed to operate with autonomy. Their members are bound by strict ethical codes and insulated from executive interference. Today, every member of the current FKF judicial bodies is new in office. The unavoidable question is simple: What happened to the previous office bearers?

Article 64 of the FKF Constitution establishes the Disciplinary Committee, Ethics Committee and Appeals Committee as the independent judicial bodies.

Article 64(5), read together with Article 57(5) of the same constitution, guarantees their independence and protects their tenures. Their appointment and removal must be approved by the general assembly, following vetting by the ethics committee under Article 30(o) and (q).

None of these constitutional procedures were followed in the installation of the current members of the judicial bodies. So, on what legal basis are the current members in office? And are their decisions legally binding? The answer is as uncomfortable as it is obvious.

If FKF persists in allowing improperly constituted judicial bodies to hear and determine matters currently before them, then it is only a matter of time before an aggrieved party moves to the Sports Disputes Tribunal, not to challenge the merits of decisions, but the legality of the decision-makers themselves.

And since in law, no one benefits from an illegality, the inevitable outcome shall, definitely, be the nullification of decisions, the quashing of proceedings and the institutionalisation of chaos.

But the crisis does not end there!

The Leagues and Competitions Committee itself appears dangerously unfamiliar with the legal instruments governing Kenyan football. And if this trajectory continues, Kenyan football is headed towards a litigation avalanche. In fact, it is not alarmist to suggest that the FKF NEC should already be budgeting for a heavy litigation fund to cater for an unprecedented wave of court battles before the season ends.

Here’s another reason why the above in inevitable.

The LCC recently communicated changes to competition rules, including provisions touching on television rights. But rules cannot be altered mid-season, and certainly not without stakeholder consultation.

You see, what many people keep forgetting is that since the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution, public participation has become a foundational principle of governance in Kenya. Football governance is not exempt.

On August 5, 2025, before the current season began, the LCC issued a circular to clubs detailing the league calendar, Fifa regulations on player transfer and status, and the 2019 rules and regulations as the governing framework for the season. On what authority were these rules later altered? Who approved the changes? Through what process?

A storm is brewing. And my finger of responsibility lies squarely on the FKF National Executive Committee members. Guys! Wake up and govern, or prepare to preside over the most expensive legal collapse in the history of Kenyan football.

And while at it, ask yourselves why Senior Counsel Ambrose Rachier decided to lead Gor Mahia’s defence in this matter. Rachier has never appeared in such cases but I think he has seen your blunders and is waiting for you with a mallet.

Suspend the proceedings. Review the process of your appointment in the judicial bodies. Rejig the membership of your committees, and you will thank me later.

• A Tell Media report / By Tell Media Correspondent