Are Africans welcome at the World Cup?

The upcoming FIFA World Cup in Los Angeles has sparked a critical legal debate regarding the apparent disparity between the celebration of African music and football, and the reported exclusion of African fans and journalists through widespread visa denials. This article examines the legal frameworks governing access to international sporting events, including international human rights instruments and the host nation's immigration laws, alongside FIFA's robust human rights commitments. It highlights the tension between the global inclusivity promoted by such tournaments and the practical barriers faced by individuals from certain regions, particularly African nationals, raising questions about potential discrimination and the responsibilities of both the host country and the organising body.

As the FIFA World Cup approaches, set to feature African music megastars like Tyla and Rema at its opening ceremony in Los Angeles, a concerning narrative is emerging: while African culture and athletic prowess are embraced, many African fans and journalists appear to be systematically excluded. Reports indicate widespread visa denials for individuals from African nations seeking to attend or cover the tournament in the United States, casting a shadow over the event's proclaimed spirit of global unity and inclusivity.

This situation presents a significant legal and ethical challenge, prompting scrutiny of the policies and practices that govern access to major international sporting events. The discrepancy between the welcoming of African artistic and sporting contributions and the alleged barriers to entry for its citizens raises critical questions about discrimination, human rights, and the obligations of host nations and international sporting federations. This article will delve into the pertinent legal frameworks, analyse the potential for claims of discrimination, and consider the implications for practitioners navigating these complex issues.

The legal landscape governing international events like the FIFA World Cup is multifaceted, encompassing both national immigration laws and international human rights principles. The host nation for the upcoming World Cup, primarily the United States, maintains sovereign control over its borders and immigration policies. Most international travellers to the U.S. require a B-2 tourist visa, with exceptions for citizens of countries participating in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) who can enter using an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). While the U.S. Department of State has introduced a FIFA PASS system to prioritise visa appointments for official ticket holders, it explicitly states that this does not guarantee visa approval or alter eligibility requirements.

Crucially, international human rights law provides a framework for non-discrimination. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) asserts that everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms "without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status." Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the United States is a signatory, obliges states to ensure rights "without distinction of any kind" and guarantees equal protection before the law, prohibiting discrimination on grounds such as race, colour, and national origin. Furthermore, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) explicitly prohibits racial discrimination in all sectors of public and private life.

FIFA itself has robust human rights commitments. Its Statutes, particularly Articles 3 and 4, enshrine a commitment to respecting internationally recognised human rights and strictly prohibit discrimination of any kind, including on account of race, skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin. Following the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, FIFA's Human Rights Policy mandates due diligence to identify and address adverse human rights impacts and explicitly references responsibilities in the bidding and event hosting process. For the 2026 World Cup, comprehensive human rights requirements were integrated into host city agreements from the outset, requiring host cities to develop tailored Human Rights Action Plans.

The reported widespread visa denials for African fans and journalists raise serious questions about potential violations of both international human rights law and FIFA's own anti-discrimination policies. While host nations retain sovereign rights over immigration, these rights are not absolute and must be exercised in a manner consistent with international obligations. The denial of visas, particularly on a broad scale affecting specific nationalities or regions, could constitute indirect discrimination if it disproportionately impacts individuals based on protected characteristics like national or ethnic origin, even if not explicitly stated as such.

Evidence of such systemic issues is mounting. Reports indicate that "many" African and Iranian journalists have been denied visas to cover the World Cup in the US. Furthermore, a prominent Somali referee, Omar Artan, was denied entry despite being selected to officiate, with the White House citing security concerns, a decision that has drawn criticism. Similarly, official supporter groups from Senegal and Ivory Coast have faced "sweeping visa rejections," effectively preventing their travel. These incidents suggest a pattern that could be challenged under Article 26 of the ICCPR, which guarantees equal protection of the law without discrimination, and Article 2 of the UDHR, which prohibits distinctions based on national origin.

FIFA's Human Rights Policy and Statutes explicitly prohibit discrimination and commit the organisation to respecting internationally recognised human rights. The policy also states that FIFA "will respect and not interfere with the work of both human rights defenders who voice concerns about adverse human rights impacts relating to FIFA and media representatives covering FIFA's events and activities." The denial of visas to journalists directly contravenes this commitment, hindering their ability to perform their professional duties. While FIFA has mandated Host City Human Rights Action Plans for the 2026 World Cup, human rights advocates have expressed skepticism, noting that some plans have fallen short or failed to adequately address risks faced by vulnerable groups, including immigrants and journalists.

From a U.S. legal perspective, while the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) prohibits national origin and citizenship status discrimination in employment, its direct applicability to visa issuance for event attendance is less straightforward. However, concerns about racial discrimination in broader U.S. immigration enforcement have been raised by human rights organisations, suggesting a systemic issue that could underpin these visa denials. The challenge for legal practitioners would be to demonstrate that the visa denials are not merely a result of legitimate national security or immigration control, but rather stem from discriminatory intent or have a disproportionate and unjustifiable discriminatory effect on African nationals, thereby violating international human rights norms and FIFA's own binding commitments.

The reported exclusion of African fans and journalists from the World Cup, despite the prominent inclusion of African cultural and sporting elements, presents a significant legal and reputational challenge for both the host nation and FIFA. For legal practitioners, this situation underscores the importance of understanding the interplay between national immigration sovereignty and international human rights obligations. Attorneys representing affected individuals or groups may explore avenues for redress under international human rights mechanisms, arguing violations of non-discrimination principles enshrined in instruments like the UDHR and ICCPR.

Furthermore, legal professionals should scrutinise the implementation of FIFA's Human Rights Policy and the Host City Human Rights Action Plans, holding the organisation and host cities accountable for their commitments to inclusivity and non-discrimination. The precedent set by these visa decisions could have lasting implications for future international sporting events, potentially eroding the universal appeal and accessibility that such tournaments are meant to embody. Moving forward, it will be crucial to monitor whether FIFA and the host nations take concrete steps to address these concerns, ensuring that the spirit of global participation extends beyond the pitch and into the stands and press boxes for all. Failure to do so risks undermining the very values that international sport purports to champion.