FIFA has been criticised by a former judge at the International Court of Justice over their failure to further sanction the Israel Football Association regarding its teams playing in the West Bank.
The Palestinian Football Association had filed a complaint against the IFA in 2024, arguing that the governing body broke FIFA statutes on sovereignty by allowing teams based in Israeli settlements in the West Bank to compete in IFA competitions.
FIFA ruled on Thursday that no punishment should be levied because “the final legal status of the West Bank remains an unresolved and highly complex matter under public international law”.
However, former ICJ judge Michael Dugard, who also served as the United Nations’ special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, cited an ICJ decision from July 2024 which appears to contradict FIFA’s belief that the issue is “unresolved”.
“FIFA and UEFA have to be held accountable for deliberately contradicting an International Court of Justice ruling on the Palestinian occupied territories,” Dugard, an advocate for the Game Over Israel campaign, told The Athletic. “The Swiss government and judiciary are directly responsible for upholding the tenets of international law with respect to those bodies.
“The ruling leaves no doubt that the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza are Palestine and Israel must leave immediately. FIFA and UEFA are sports washing and committing flagrant breaches of international law, including but not limited to the perpetration of genocide, apartheid and occupation by allowing continued participation by Israel.”
The International Court of Justice is the primary court of the United Nations, serving to settle legal disputes between states. Its 2024 judgement found that: “The court is not convinced that the extension of Israel’s law to the West Bank and East Jerusalem is justified under any of the grounds laid down in the second paragraph of Article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
“For these reasons, the court considers that Israel has exercised its regulatory authority as an occupying power in a manner that is inconsistent with the rule(s) reflected in the Hague Regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention.”
Israel rejects the finding, it argues that a Jewish presence has existed on the West Bank for thousands of years and was recognized by the League of Nations in 1922.
After the UN judgement was published, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on social media that “the Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land” and “no absurd opinion in The Hague can deny this historical truth or the legal right of Israelis to live in their own communities in our ancestral home.”
In February that year, the ICJ had held hearings at the Peace Palace, in which the New York Times reported that a few speakers at the court, including those from the United States, Britain and Hungary — among Israel’s traditional allies — sided with Israel.
The ICJ’s compulsory jurisdiction is over sovereign states and does not directly preside over private sporting bodies such as FIFA. The world football governing body, however, states its human rights policy is in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
FIFA’s disciplinary committee did sanction the IFA for failing to prevent Israeli Premier League side Beitar Jerusalem from carrying out racist and discriminatory behaviour. The IFA has been fined CHF 150,000 ($289,000), told it must display an anti-racism banner, and introduce a prevention plan across the season. It can be appealed.
In a separate legal case, Swiss local parliamentaries voted against revoking UEFA’s tax-free status by a tally of 74 to 53 on Tuesday.
The Grand Council of the Vaud Canton rejected the proposition that UEFA failed to meet its responsibility to “promote peace” by not disciplining Israeli football teams based in settlements in the West Bank, a decision that could have cost UEFA up to €30million per year.
FIFA and UEFA have both been contacted for comment.