Council of Europe Accuses FIFA of Undermining Football Integrity, Demands New Accord

The Council of Europe’s Open Letter to FIFA

On the final day of the 2026 World Cup, Council of Europe Secretary General Alain Berset released a sharply worded open letter accusing FIFA of actions that “undermine the integrity” of football. The letter, published just hours before the Argentina–Spain final, adds an institutional voice to the criticism that has trailed the North American tournament. Berset’s intervention carries particular weight because the Council of Europe maintains a formal agreement with FIFA, signed in 2018.

The letter catalogues three main grievances. First, Berset highlights political interference, pointing to the widely reported incident in which a red card shown to US forward Folarin Balogan was allegedly overturned after President Donald Trump phoned FIFA President Gianni Infantino. Second, he cites racist insults directed at players, including a remark by Paraguayan official Celeste Amarilla that Kylian Mbappé was “a Cameroonian carefully pretending to be French.” Third, Berset takes aim at FIFA’s April partnership with ADI Predictstreet, a prediction market platform he equates with traditional betting, arguing that any form of wagering linked to football is “an open door to fraud.”

Citing these issues, Berset demands that FIFA enter negotiations on a new “framework agreement” to replace the 2018 Memorandum of Understanding. He insists the current pact must be revised well before the 2030 World Cup to ensure that FIFA upholds human rights standards and good governance. The letter signals that the Council of Europe sees its existing accord as leverage, and it expects a “working dialogue” to begin promptly.

What Berset’s Accusations Signal for FIFA’s Future

Political Meddling: The Balogan Red Card Fallout

The most explosive charge is that US political pressure directly influenced a match official’s decision. Regardless of the exact phone call details, the reversal of Balogan’s red card after reported presidential intervention has eroded confidence in refereeing impartiality. Berset frames this as “rules bending under pressure” and warns that such episodes call all results into question. For FIFA, the incident fuels a perception that its president is susceptible to political leverage, which could affect how future host nations interact with the governing body.

Racism in Football Governance

Racist remarks by figures connected to the tournament—an elected Paraguayan official mocking Mbappé’s nationality—present a failure of FIFA’s institutional anti‑discrimination commitments. The Council of Europe explicitly references the remarks, tying them to the wider failure of governance that the 2018 MoU was supposed to prevent. By naming specific cases, Berset raises the bar for what FIFA must do: simply issuing condemnations is no longer enough when its own framework promises upheld human rights.

The Betting Partnership Controversy

FIFA’s deal with ADI Predictstreet opens a new front. The platform allows users to wager on discrete match events, a format Berset says blurs the line with traditional betting and inherently invites fraud. Although ADI Predictstreet is marketed as a prediction market rather than a bookmaker, the distinction is unlikely to shield FIFA from criticism that it is commercialising the same behaviours that spawn match‑fixing. The letter implies that even if no fraud has occurred, the mere structure of betting on non‑score events is incompatible with sound integrity controls.

The MoU: A Soft Power Lever

Unlike sports bodies or NGOs that have criticised FIFA, the Council of Europe holds a formal Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2018 that obliges FIFA to respect standards of human rights and “sound governance.” This gives Berset’s call a quasi‑contractual edge: if FIFA refuses to renegotiate, the Council could suspend or terminate the agreement. That would strip FIFA of an important European institutional endorsement, potentially complicating relations with host nations and sponsors that value the political cover the MoU provides. While the letter is not legally binding, it shifts the debate from media opinion to intergovernmental demand, a dynamic that could shape planning for the 2030 cycle.

Where FIFA Goes from Here

For FIFA’s leadership, the open letter raises urgent governance questions that go beyond public relations.

• Respond formally to the renegotiation demand. Ignoring Berset’s call could risk the MoU and the political cover it provides for European‑based events. FIFA’s board will almost certainly have to discuss the letter as the 2030 World Cup planning accelerates.
• Re‑examine the ADI Predictstreet partnership. The Council of Europe’s fraud concerns may force FIFA to review whether the deal aligns with its anti‑match‑fixing rules. A public commitment to limit betting‑related marketing or to subject the partnership to an independent integrity audit could defuse this line of attack.
• Strengthen anti‑racism protocols. With a specific racist remark from an official connected to the tournament on record, FIFA will face demands from Council of Europe member states’ national associations for stricter sanctions and independent monitoring of discrimination at its events. A concrete policy upgrade before the next qualifiers would address this directly.