UEFA is reportedly gearing up to file criminal charges against FIFA President Gianni Infantino in connection with a controversial plan to sell portions of the World Cup broadcasting and commercial rights to private investors. The move marks a dramatic escalation in the long‑running power struggle between football’s two most influential governing bodies and signals UEFA’s intent to pursue legal remedies that go beyond the usual political pressure tactics. According to newly disclosed legal filings, UEFA has issued subpoenas to FIFA and to several financial institutions operating in the United States, demanding a full set of documents that pertain to the proposed transaction. The subpoenas are intended to uncover the details of how the deal was structured, how the valuation was determined, and what financing arrangements were put in place.
UEFA’s legal team is seeking evidence that could demonstrate misconduct, negligence, or outright fraud in the way the deal was negotiated and marketed. While the investigative steps are being taken in the United States, the actual criminal complaint is expected to be filed in Switzerland, where FIFA’s headquarters are located.
By choosing the Swiss jurisdiction, UEFA hopes to bring the case directly to the seat of FIFA’s executive power and to make use of Swiss criminal statutes that cover abuse of office and mismanagement of assets. The specific provision cited in the draft complaint is Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code, which criminalizes the misuse of a position of authority for personal or third‑party gain. The significance of this development lies in its breadth.
UEFA is not merely seeking to remove Infantino from his position; it is aiming to hold him personally accountable for what it describes as a “secretive structuring, valuation, financing, and marketing” of a deal that, in UEFA’s view, caused measurable harm to FIFA’s reputation, its governance structure, and its commercial relationships. The complaint alleges that the transaction inflicted a direct and concrete injury not only on FIFA as an organization but also on its 211 member associations, including the 55 national federations that belong to UEFA. A legal document obtained by Sky News quotes the UEFA filing as stating: "UEFA and other interested parties are preparing to bring criminal claims in Switzerland against Infantino and possibly other FIFA officials and advisors for criminal mismanagement under Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code and such further or alternative charges as the developed factual record may support, arising out of the secretive structuring, valuation, financing, and marketing of a transaction that inflicted direct and concrete injury on FIFA's reputation, governance authority, and commercial relationships to the detriment of FIFA as well as its 211 members, including UEFA's 55 member associations." The filing in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York specifically targets JP Morgan Chase, which acted as a financial advisor on the deal, as well as Thrive Capital, a venture‑capital firm that was slated to be the lead investor.
Thrive Capital’s chief executive, Joshua Kushner, is also named in the complaint. Kushner is the brother of Jared Kushner, former senior adviser to President Donald Trump, adding a political dimension to the case that could attract additional media scrutiny.
UEFA’s strategy appears to involve a two‑pronged legal assault. By suing the banks and investors in New York, UEFA hopes to freeze assets, compel the production of internal communications, and potentially secure damages. Simultaneously, by filing criminal charges in Switzerland, UEFA aims to trigger a formal investigation by Swiss prosecutors that could result in fines, bans, or even imprisonment for those found guilty of violating Swiss law.
The choice of Miami as a venue for part of the litigation is also noteworthy. FIFA’s legal department is based in Miami, meaning that any court action there would directly confront the organization’s own counsel and could force the release of internal legal opinions and strategy documents.
This tactic mirrors previous high‑profile cases in which UEFA has used the courts to pressure FIFA into transparency, such as the investigations into the 2022 World Cup bidding process. If the criminal proceedings move forward, the implications for world football could be profound. A conviction of Infantino or senior FIFA officials would not only destabilize the current leadership but could also open the door for a broader governance overhaul. UEFA has long advocated for reforms that increase accountability, improve financial oversight, and give national associations a greater voice in decision‑making.
A successful legal challenge could provide the leverage needed to implement those reforms. Critics, however, caution that the legal battle may become protracted and costly for both parties. International sports law is a complex field, and jurisdictional issues often lead to delays. Moreover, the political fallout could affect relationships with sponsors, broadcasters, and governments that have vested interests in the smooth operation of the sport’s premier competitions.
In the meantime, UEFA has continued to promote its own initiatives, including a new fan‑engagement platform called "Super 6" that offers participants the chance to win a £1 million prize. While the promotion appears unrelated to the legal dispute, it underscores UEFA’s broader strategy of maintaining public interest and goodwill while it navigates the high‑stakes courtroom drama.
Overall, the unfolding saga represents a rare instance of a continental football confederation taking direct criminal action against the head of the global governing body. Whether the Swiss authorities will open a full investigation, and what the ultimate outcome will be, remains to be seen. What is clear is that the case has raised the stakes in the ongoing battle over control, transparency, and the commercial future of the sport that billions of fans around the world follow with passion.