Written by Dr. Hamada El-Antably

Following the announcement of the penalties issued by the Disciplinary and Ethics Committee of the Egyptian Football Association (EFA) regarding the Super Cup match events between Al-Ahly and Zamalek—which ended with the latter winning on penalties, followed by unfortunate incidents that tarnished Egypt’s image, especially given that the match was held in the sisterly United Arab Emirates—these penalties were described by the majority of observers and legal experts as unjust and unsupported by established regulations. They applied a double standard, with officials attempting to play a power-balancing game that unfortunately tilted in favor of one side at the expense of the other, namely Al-Ahly.

Everyone awaited Al-Ahly’s reactions, especially after yesterday’s announcement that the Al-Ahly board of directors would hold an emergency meeting today to respond in a way that preserves the club’s rights. Today, the FA issued the justifications for its decisions in defense of what was enacted. It is notable that these justifications bear no resemblance whatsoever to the issued decisions.

Subsequently, Al-Ahly’s board of directors met at the scheduled time and released a statement clearly reflecting that Al-Ahly possesses an institutional administration that follows legal frameworks in responding to penalties it deemed unjust and legally flawed, as the statement described. This came after the board thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the penalties and their justifications, investigated the facts to refute all dimensions and consequences of the decision, and examined what the decisions were based upon. The statement highlighted that the penalties were issued based on a regulation that was not communicated to the clubs despite Al-Ahly requesting it multiple times, that it was not amended by the General Assembly, and that no authorization was granted to amend the previous regulation.

Consequently, Al-Ahly decided to take all legal measures to preserve the club’s rights in light of international regulations, and to file a complaint against the current temporary committee of FIFA and its president for their clear bias toward the rival club—to the extent that the committee president celebrated the victory like a fan rather than a federation president.

Therefore, I reiterate my appreciation for the professionalism of Al-Ahly and its management, their keenness to follow the foundations of institutional administration, and consequently, the board’s decision-making process to safeguard the club’s rights. In the coming hours, we await the outcome of this fierce battle to prove who is stronger: the Five-Member Committee, Al-Ahly, or Zamalek. This is especially true since Zamalek confirmed on its official website its withdrawal from the Premier League and refusal to participate under this committee, which it described as illegal.

I have said it before and will repeat it over and over: “He who escapes punishment misbehaves.” Unfortunately, however, we live in a country where only the weak are punished. In local terms: “He who has a backer never takes a hit to the stomach.”

To Allah belongs the command before and after.

By Dr. Hamada El-Antably