Political activist Solomon Owusu and lawyer Andrew Appiah-Danquah have petitioned the Ghana Football Association, calling for the initiation of a continental process to review the continued suitability of Dr. Patrice Tlhopane Motsepe as President of the Confederation of African Football (CAF).

The petition, addressed to the GFA President through the Executive Council, was filed by political activist Solomon Owusu and Andrew Appiah-Danquah, Esq.

They stated that the petition is “motivated by our commitment to the ideals of Pan-Africanism, African solidarity, anti-discrimination, and the integrity of African football as a unifying force across the continent.”

The petitioners stressed that the document “is not directed against Dr. Patrice Motsepe on account of his nationality, race, or personal background,” and added that it is also “neither a challenge to his business achievements nor personal accomplishments.”

However, they argued that their concerns stem from “the growing contradiction between CAF’s stated commitment to African unity and inclusion and the continuing association of its highest office with a state that has, over many years, become associated in the minds of many Africans with recurring xenophobic hostility toward fellow Africans.”

The petitioners described CAF as “not merely a football governing body” but “one of Africa’s most visible continental institutions.”

They explained that through football, CAF promotes “African unity, cultural integration, solidarity among African peoples, the rejection of discrimination, and the celebration of a common African identity.”

According to them, football remains “one of the few institutions capable of bringing together Africans across linguistic, religious, ethnic, and national boundaries.”

They added that the President of CAF therefore serves “not merely as an administrator but as a symbol of African unity.”

The petitioners noted that CAF has consistently positioned itself as an opponent of “racism, discrimination, exclusion, intolerance, and hatred.”

They further stated that CAF’s campaigns and public statements have repeatedly affirmed that “football should unite rather than divide.”

According to the petition, these principles “are fundamental to the credibility of the organisation.”

The petition highlighted that for many years, South Africa has experienced repeated outbreaks of xenophobic violence directed primarily at fellow Africans.

It stated that citizens of several African countries have suffered “physical attacks; destruction of businesses; displacement; intimidation; and loss of life.”

The petitioners said these incidents “have attracted widespread condemnation across the African continent and have significantly damaged perceptions of African solidarity.”

They noted that while responsibility for such acts does not attach to any individual citizen, “the persistence of these incidents has created a crisis of confidence among many Africans regarding South Africa’s commitment to Pan-African ideals.”

The petitioners argued that leadership of a continental institution requires more than administrative competence.

They stated that it “requires moral legitimacy and symbolic credibility.”

According to them, the CAF President “must be capable of commanding the confidence of all Africans and embodying the values which CAF seeks to promote.”

They added that when Africans perceive a contradiction between those values and the national environment from which the President emerges, “CAF’s moral authority is weakened.”

The petitioners noted that “the liberation of South Africa from apartheid was made possible through the sacrifices of the entire African continent.”

They stated that African nations contributed “resources, diplomatic support, political solidarity, and moral leadership in support of the anti-apartheid struggle.”

According to the petition, expectations of Pan-African solidarity from South Africa are therefore “necessarily higher than those imposed upon many other states.”

They added that “the recurring victimisation of fellow Africans within South Africa has therefore generated understandable concern throughout the continent.”

The petitioners described the Ghana Football Association as “a historically respected voice within African football.”

They noted that Ghana occupies a unique position in Pan-African history and “remains the home of the African Continental Free Trade Area Secretariat.”

They further stated that as the nation of Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana possesses “both the moral authority and historical responsibility to raise concerns affecting the integrity of continental institutions.”

The petitioners are requesting that the Ghana Football Association:

(1) “Place before CAF and the relevant CAF statutory organs concerns regarding the continuing contradiction between CAF’s anti-discrimination principles and the symbolism associated with its present leadership.”

(2) “Initiate consultations with other African football associations regarding the suitability of the current CAF leadership structure in advancing African unity and solidarity.”

(3) “Sponsor a formal review within CAF concerning leadership accountability and the alignment of CAF’s leadership with the organization’s stated values.”

(4) “Promote the adoption of stronger ethical and Pan-African leadership criteria for future CAF office holders;” and

(5) “Where deemed appropriate following consultation with member associations, support a motion for leadership renewal at CAF.”

The petitioners stressed that African football “must remain a vehicle for African unity.”

They further stated that CAF “must continue to represent the highest ideals of inclusion, solidarity, and mutual respect among African peoples.”

According to them, where legitimate concerns arise regarding the credibility of those ideals, “member associations have both the right and the responsibility to raise them.”

They therefore called on the Ghana Football Association to “exercise leadership within African football by initiating a continental conversation on this important matter and by taking all lawful and appropriate steps necessary to protect the integrity, credibility, and moral authority of CAF.”