The Court of Arbitration for Sport -CAS- has ordered the Confederation of African Football -CAF- to postpone the tie between AS Douanes, of Mauritania, and CR Belouizdad, of Algeria, following an appeal by Hafia FC, of Guinea. The Guinean club challenges CAF’s decision to reschedule its match against AS Douanes after the Mauritanian side could not travel to Conakry: the confederation accepted force majeure, while Hafia attributes the absence to an organisational failure. The provisional measure affects both legs of the next round, neither of which can take place before 6 November.
The dispute also concerns the effectiveness of internal appeals: Hafia approached CAS without having received a decision from CAF’s Appeals Jury, while AS Douanes had already played the rescheduled match and progressed. The intervention puts the next tie on hold pending resolution of the challenge, but neither awards Hafia a place in the next round nor finds CAF’s decision incorrect. Belouizdad confirmed that it received notification of the postponement after arriving in Nouakchott, where it had trained and attended the technical meeting. Its preparations have therefore been disrupted by a dispute originating in the previous round.
The origins of the appeal
The dispute began on 11 September, when the aircraft due to carry the AS Douanes delegation from Nouakchott to Conakry could not take off. The team was due to play Hafia there in the second leg of the first preliminary round. CAF’s Competitions Division considered the circumstances a case of force majeure and rescheduled the match for the following weekend. The Guinean club, however, maintains that the absence resulted from an organisational failure and questions whether it justified changing the date.
Hafia appealed to CAF’s Appeals Jury on 16 September. The match took place on 19 September, with AS Douanes winning 1–0 to advance. On 8 October, without a decision from the internal appeals body, the Guinean club turned to CAS, requesting an expedited procedure and provisional measures. That sequence takes the issue beyond the interpretation of force majeure: a team had progressed while the appeal against the decision allowing the match to take place remained unresolved.
Appealing while the competition continues
Hafia says in its statement that CAS identified two problems: CAF’s failure to provide reasons for its force majeure decision and the lack of a response to its appeal. The tribunal’s public summary confirms that the internal appeal remained unresolved when the club initiated arbitration, but does not elaborate on the alleged lack of reasoning. That assertion therefore remains attributed to the club’s statement. The full order would clarify the grounds for the provisional measure, which does not constitute a final ruling on CAF’s conduct.
Provisional protection addresses the risk that the competition calendar could make a future ruling difficult to implement. If the next tie went ahead before it was established who was entitled to play, any subsequent correction would also affect the opposing club and later rounds. The postponement preserves room for a decision, although it disrupts the teams’ preparations and arrangements. An appeal’s effectiveness also depends on whether it can be resolved before its sporting consequences become difficult to reverse. Providing reasons for decisions and handling challenges promptly allows clubs to defend their rights before further results complicate the situation.
Three clubs awaiting a decision
Belouizdad is dealing with the consequences of a dispute originating in the previous round. According to a report published on Monday by ‘Compétition’, the club sought to bring forward its postponed league match against Olympique Akbou, but the Algerian Professional Football League -LFP- rejected the request because of its existing schedule. The club is now seeking to play USM Alger on 24 October. These are attempts to fill the gap left by the continental postponement, rather than a confirmed fixture change, illustrating how an arbitration measure also affects coordination between competitions.
The next step rests with CAS, which must rule on the merits of the dispute, and then with CAF, which must schedule the tie so that it can be completed before the opening group-stage matchday. The 6 November date is the earliest the matches may take place, rather than a confirmed fixture date or an announced deadline for the award. Whether rescheduling on force majeure grounds was justified, and what consequences a ruling in Hafia’s favour might have, remain unresolved. The provisional measure preserves those questions without deciding which club should continue in the competition.
Last related articles
