EU Parliament Members Demand Accountability After FIFA Bows to Trump’s Interference
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Three progressive European Parliament lawmakers are calling for an ethics investigation into FIFA president Gianni Infantino, after he caved to political pressure from Donald Trump and lifted a red-card suspension for striker Samuel Balogun.
European Parliament members Barry Andrews, Lara Wolters, and Niels Fuglsang have sounded the alarm on the dangerous erosion of fairness in international football, after FIFA president Gianni Infantino apparently capitulated to right-wing U.S. President Donald Trump’s intervention. Trump personally contacted Infantino to advocate for striker Samuel Balogun, who had received a red card in a match against Bosnia-Herzegovina on July 1, a penalty that should have barred him from the next game. In a move that reeks of political favoritism, FIFA’s disciplinary committee subsequently lifted the suspension.
The lawmakers issued a joint statement urging the national football associations of EU member states to demand that FIFA’s Ethics Committee investigate whether Infantino allowed Trump’s political pressure to dictate the outcome, and to scrutinize other possible violations of political neutrality—such as the deeply controversial awarding of a FIFA Peace Prize to Trump. The lawmakers highlighted that 35 parliamentarians have already signed the letter, showing widespread concern over the politicization of sport.
"When Infantino allows political pressure to determine who gets to play, this sense of fairness goes out the window," the statement said, underscoring the threat to the integrity of the game when powerful elites meddle for their own interests.
FIFA, seeking to deflect criticism, claimed the suspension was lifted by its disciplinary committee in accordance with its procedures, but failed to address the core issue of undue political influence.