FKF-KPL showdown heads to Sports Disputes Tribunal

The eligibility and current structure of the Kenyan Premier League (KPL) is set to dominate the ongoing tussle between local football administrators over the composition of next year's top flight competition in the coming days, Daily Nation Sport has reliably learnt.

This three-year old argument pitting successive Football Kenya Federation (FKF) regimes against the Kenyan Premier League was yet again reignited last month, when the latter took the matter before the Sports Disputes Tribunal.

At the time, KPL CEO Jack Oguda successfully obtained an injunction at the Sports Tribunal which barred his bosses at FKF from discussing the possibility of increasing the number of teams participating in next season's SportPesa Premier League from 16 to 18, at its annual general meeting on October 14.

"All we are asking for is an interpretation of the rules, you know we have a Memorandum of Understanding in place with FKF on how this matter should be handled," insists Oguda.

The national football body doesn't seem to subscribe to Oguda's comments however, and are this week expected to defend their stance at the John Ohaga led Tribunal.

"Now that they have taken us to court, we have no option other than defend ourselves, and that we vehemently will," a charged FKF president Nick Mwendwa told Daily Nation Sport.

Interestingly, sources close to this wrangles have told Daily Nation Sport that FKF intends to among other issues, put up a case challenging the eligibility of KPL's parent company.

According to records in our possession, KPL's ownership structure as at November 4, 2016, is surprisingly restricted to four entities and not the 16 participating clubs in the competition, as has been spelt in their rule book.

These four entities are Xxcel Africa Limited (or Mathare United FC), AFC Leopards Sports Club, Gor Mahia Football Club and Sher Agencies Limited.

It will be interesting to note how Ohaga and his colleagues will rule on this discrepancy in relation to the eligibility claim by FKF, and further more if this subject could determine the outcome of the case.

At the same time, FKF spokesman Barry Otieno dismissed the possibility of using the pre-signed MOU between the previous FKF office led by Sam Nyamweya in clearing out the stalemate. The MOU was arrived at following deliberations between FKF, KPL and Fifa.

"As a federation" Otieno charged, "it is our position that the MOU from the onset was tailored to maintain the status quo and stifle football development in the country by benefitting a chosen few."

Otieno in particular took issue with clause 1.3 of the MOU which states in part; "Neither FKF or KPL may have more votes than the other by way of having additional members present, but KPL shall have the casting vote in the event of a tied vote (during the negotiations)."

Interestingly, KPL is at the moment battling a separate legal and contractual standoff with Mathare United - an entity long considered its trusted shareholder in the public eye.

Through its chairman Bob Munro, Mathare last week wrote an official complaint to the league's Independent Disciplinary and Complains Committee accusing the league's organisers and sponsors SportPesa of unlawfully prohibiting them from displaying their banners during league matches.

"The KPL-SportPesa Agreement on July 17, 2015 was not signed with the prior informed consent and approval of the KPL Governing Council," Munro alleges.

Munro added that; "Moreover, the agreement even specifically states that the exclusivity of SportPesa as the KPL Title Rights Sponsors does not extend to the team sponsorship of individual teams,"

This misunderstanding stems from a possible conflict of interest between Mathare's recently signed long term association with betting firm Betway - who are SportPesa's direct competitors.