25 April 2020 – The recent shenanigans about the SASCOC elections, media coverage and subsequent suspension of the Acting President necessitated this media release.

Suffice to say that the preamble of the SASCOC constitution states, “The Founding Members, which consist of South African sports organisations and sportspersons, have unequivocally pledged to unite and commit themselves towards an improved system based upon the principles of equal opportunity, non-racialism and non-sexism for all persons ……..”.

This unequivocally bounds SASCOC to sound principles of good corporate governance.

It is important to note the following;

  • SASCOC constitution clause no 12.1 to clause no 12.11 deals with compliance matters.
  • Clause no 12.12 is regarding the SASCOC Auditor receiving the nomination forms which should be signed by the President and Secretary of each Nominating Federation.
  • Thereafter, after seven days, the Auditor shall submit the nominations to the CEO, clause 12.14.
  • The CEO in turn, on behalf of the Board shall send the list of acceptable nominations to the Members, clause no 12.15.
  • Prior to the commencement of the meeting, the meeting shall appoint an Electoral Officer and two other persons as scrutineers who are not candidates, to conduct the elections, clause no 12.16.
  • Clause 12.23 refers to dispute resolution in the event of a dispute at elections.
  •  Furthermore, clause no 29.1 to 29.4 refers to resolving disputes within the Association or its Members.
  • Clause no 29.5 to 29.6 deals with processes up to the Court for Arbitration and Sport, whilst clause 29.7 is a prohibitive clause.

Having stated the above, at no point does it refer to the SASCOC Board having any powers to determine or approve nominations. That is the sole mandate of the Auditor, and, if aggrieved, that person can invoke clause 29, Dispute Mechanism and Resolution. Worth noting is that the majority of the current SASCOC Board are nominees for the 2020 – 2024 Board. Therefore any decision taken by that Board implies conflict of interest. In the event of a grievance lodged by individual candidates, the CEO should`ve advised them of clause 29 and not discuss it at a Board meeting where the majority is conflicted. In 2009, the SAFA Electoral Officer remarked that no court can install anybody into or eliminate from a position, only its Members can do that.

SAFA is of the opinion that;

  1. Any candidate who submitted their names and is eligible, should be allowed to participate in the elections,
  2. No further interference by the SASCOC Board in the electoral processes,
  3.  SASCOC, by public admission, does not have bottomless resources and should stop this exercise of wasting money on endless court cases and seeking legal advice. These meagre resources should be used on athletes’ preparations for various championships,
  4. Members should be allowed to congregate and vote for their leaders, post COVID-19 and, obviously, if it’s safe,
  5. The SASCOC Board must stop debating the issue of candidates and start planning for the Congress, enabling Members to elect their Leaders.

Issued by the Communications Department: SAFA

For further enquiries, kindly contact:

Dominic Chimhavi

Head of Department: Communications

+27 71 332 9886