UEFA Demands FIFA Answer 42 Questions on Infantino

UEFA has given FIFA until November 2 to answer 42 questions about Gianni Infantino's presidency and hand over documents tied to an abandoned World Cup investment plan. The deadline falls 16 days before nominations close for the March 18, 2027, FIFA presidential election, in which Infantino is seeking re-election. For European football's governing body, that timetable leaves little room for delay.

The demand came in a letter signed by UEFA general secretary Theodore Theodoridis on behalf of European FIFA Council members. The letter said Infantino's apology and later explanation at a FIFA Council meeting hadn't satisfied their concerns. "These explanations have not begun satisfactorily to address a number of fundamental questions raised by Council members," it said. It went further, arguing that withdrawing the investment plan, admitting mistakes and promising "potential governance reforms" don't explain how decisions were taken or why the Council wasn't involved at the appropriate stage.

The Questions on the Table

The 42 questions cover a wide range of issues. They include Infantino's personal remuneration package, payments to singer Marc Anthony, and the handling of USA striker Folarin Balogun's disciplinary case. They also ask about business and political relationships involving US President Donald Trump and his family, and whether FIFA's judicial, electoral and ethics committees operate independently. The letter warned that any refusal to disclose material must be justified item by item. "Any refusal to disclose information or documents should be justified individually, with a clear explanation of the specific grounds relied upon," it said.

UEFA was blunt about timing. The answers, it argued, can't wait for the next FIFA Council meeting, scheduled for December 16 in Doha, Qatar, after nominations close. "These questions require answers now," the letter said. "They cannot be deferred until the next meeting of the FIFA Council — nor can future governance reforms substitute for scrutiny of decisions already taken and accountability for them."

The FIFA Forward Enterprise Affair

The dispute centres on FIFA Forward Enterprise, an investment plan Infantino launched in July and quickly dropped under strong opposition led by Europe. The plan was described as a $4.2 billion World Cup sell-off. Infantino hasn't provided documents about it. UEFA has asked US federal courts to authorise subpoenas compelling document production and sworn testimony. FIFA's lawyers have claimed UEFA is harassing Infantino, while Al Jazeera said it contacted FIFA for comment but received no reply.

European officials had voiced frustration after a FIFA Council meeting the previous week, saying the president had offered little clarity. The Independent reported that UEFA had earlier called for Infantino to resign over governance concerns about the plan's private-investor element. Infantino apologised to the Council and invited written questions ahead of the December 16 meeting. UEFA's letter implies that invitation isn't a substitute for direct answers.

What the Deadline Means for Federations

The November 2 date gives national federations time to weigh FIFA's response, or its absence, while they can still nominate or back a challenger. It's a practical point, not just a political one. Federations that want to act on governance concerns need the information before the nomination window shuts, not afterward.

The episode raises a broader question about accountability in sporting bodies with enormous financial power. According to UEFA, decisions about a multibillion-dollar asset were taken without the Council's involvement at the proper stage. Whatever the outcome, that's a procedural failure member bodies have every right to probe.

Why This Matters: The contest for FIFA's presidency isn't a routine renewal. European federations, which hold significant voting weight and commercial interests, are openly challenging how decisions were made and whether the institution's internal checks work. A governing body that controls the world's biggest sporting event has to explain its finances and decision-making to the members who fund and depend on it. If FIFA declines to answer by November 2, or answers only partially, the nomination period will open with the governance question unresolved. For the federations that must choose a candidate, that uncertainty is itself a cost, one that falls on the wider football community, which has to live with the outcome for years.