Football Federation Australia have defender the board's controversial involvement in this week's failed peace talks that involved FIFA and the Asian Football Confederation after coming under heavy criticism form the game's stakeholders.
The A-League clubs accused the FFA board and its chairman Steven Lowy of twice obstructing agreements between three sets of stakeholders that would have ended the bitter impasse over the expansion of the FFA Congress.
After the state member federations, A-League clubs and players union (The PFA) twice reached consensus for a new membership structure of the FFA as required by FIFA, the FFA Board met privately with the state member federations. Following both meetings, the agreements broke down.
The FFA denied any suggestion it acted improperly during the discussions on Wednesday and Thursday. While Lowy was unavailable for comment on Friday an FFA spokesman claimed the FFA board is entitled to meet privately with one specific group of stakeholders as part of the negotiations for an expanded Congress.
"It is entirely appropriate for the FFA Board to share its view with the members and any other interested party as to what balance in the Congress it believes is appropriate to ensure the interests of whole game are promoted. It is not right to suggest that the FFA Board should not be actively involved in any debate about the company where they have been specifically tasked with acting in the best interests of it," an FFA spokesman said.
It follows complaints from several stakeholders who were under the impression the FFA was not a stakeholder in the discussion, rather as a facilitator. Their understanding was the board could not influence the composition of the Congress, which elects board members, removes board members and holds the board accountable.
That stance stemmed from correspondence from FIFA in March stating a need for an agreement between all stakeholders involved in the consultation process, listed specifically as the state member federations, the A-League clubs and the PFA.
The position of FIFA was reiterated in another letter on July 5 where the governing body's secretary general, Fatma Samoura, on four occasions listed the "the stakeholders involved in the process" as the state member federations, the A-League clubs and the PFA.
That correspondence gave the stakeholders the impression the FFA board was not to play an active role in the negotiations. However, an FFA spokesman suggested that FIFA definition was only in reference to the composition of the Congress, rather than the role of the FFA board in the discussions.
The FFA suggest the board was permitted to take an active role in the Congress talks citing the organisation's statutes and Commonwealth law.
"FFA have a number of duties under the FFA Constitution and Corporations Act, including to act in good faith, in the best interests of the corporation and for a proper purpose. The directors of FFA must also act in accordance with the objects of the company which are broadly to advance the interests of the whole of the game," an FFA spokesman said.
