நிதி உதவி வழங்க !
UPI ID : enb@axis.com
UPI ID : enb@axis.com
Judiciary in the spotlight as opposition mounts over Govt bid to extend judges’ retirement ageBar Association forum sees local and international law experts critiquing proposed move; SLPP calls it as interference in judiciaryPossible probe looms over then Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe; CIABOC alleges he was in Dubai during Rakitha and Charith’s meeting with Harak Kata’s wifeGovt elated over IMF statement and World Bank’s upgrade of Sri Lanka to upper-middle-income status; Minister says too early for fresh IMF dealBy our ST Political Desk 05-07-26Amid increasing signs that the National People’s Power (NPP) government is seriously considering introducing a constitutional amendment to increase the retirement age of judges of the superior courts, opposition to the move is also gaining momentum.The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), which had earlier written to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake urging him to scrap such plans, yesterday held a public forum on the position of the legal fraternity in relation to amending the constitution to extend the retirement age of the judges, including those of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.The retirement age extension for appellate court judges being mooted is for two years, from the current 65 to 67 for judges of the Supreme Court and from 63 to 65 for judges of the Court of Appeal. At present, High Court judges retire at 61 and District Court judges and magistrates at 60.The forum included nearly a dozen local and foreign speakers. Some were physically present, while others joined in via Zoom or sent in recorded messages. Those who spoke included Steven Thiru, President of the Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association; Yap Teong Liang, President of the Law Association for Asia and the Pacific (LAWAsia); Prof. Savitri Goonesekere, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Colombo; Dr. Deepika Udagama, former Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and former Head of the Department of Law, University of Peradeniya; and M.A. Sumanthiran, PC, former MP.Elaborating on the position of the BASL regarding plans to raise the retirement age of superior court judges, its president, Rajeev Amarasuriya, said that the BASL has raised its objections to the ad hoc amendment to the Constitution to extend the retirement age of judges, including the judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. He reminded the gathering that the association had written to President Dissanayake on May 25, urging both the president and his government to not proceed with any such amendment.He reiterated the view expressed in the BASL’s letter that the age of retirement of the judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, which has stood at 63 years and 65 years, respectively, from the promulgation of the 1978 Constitution, “should not be changed arbitrarily and that such a change is neither necessary nor desirable.”He pointed out that two international legal associations—the Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association and the Law Association for Asia and the Pacific (whose representatives also spoke on the occasion)—had also expressed concern over the independence of the judiciary and had affirmed that it should be extensively protected.The BASL-organised public forum comes at a time when the government has changed course from its previous stance that such an amendment had not been discussed at the Cabinet level. The Sunday Times reported last week that the government would continue to consider the extension of the retirement age of the judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal by two years in each court. The government’s justification is that such a move is aimed at ensuring that experienced judges are retained in service for longer periods. Critics of these plans allege that the government is seeking to influence the judiciary.Opposition parties are also keeping a close eye on moves by the government to raise the retirement age of judges of the superior courts.Plans to extend the retirement age of judges of the superior courts come as eight positions in the two courts (four each in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal) remain vacant. Government sources say the first task will be to fill vacancies in the lower courts, and 50 new magistrates are to be appointed to fill these vacancies. The vacancies in the higher courts will be filled afterwards, they insist.The government’s insistence that vacancies in the lower courts must be filled before moving on to those in the higher courts and its argument that appointments to the superior courts should not be based chiefly on seniority of rank are flimsy excuses to mask a concerted attempt to influence the judiciary, said Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) General Secretary Sagara Kariyawasam.He noted that under former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, judges from the Court of Appeal were elevated to the Supreme Court based on their seniority, ensuring there was a clear and transparent path to filling vacancies in the superior courts. “The current government, in contrast, is trying to fill these positions in an ad hoc manner by picking judges, disregarding their seniority. This sends a wrong message to the judiciary by indicating to them that they can be elevated to the highest courts of the land if they deliver judgements that are favourable to those in power,” he said.Highlighting the eight existing vacancies in the superior courts, Mr Kariyawasam said the normal procedure was to fill the vacancies in the Court of Appeal from the high courts and the vacancies in the Supreme Court from the Court of Appeal. “The way the current government is acting, though, means that no judicial officer has any idea as to who will be elevated to the vacant positions. Uncertainty surrounding these appointments could create competition in the lower courts among judges hoping to be promoted to the superior courts,” he said.Amid the ongoing controversies surrounding the judiciary, Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena warned that a country can be destroyed within a short period of time, not just by a natural disaster but also by a bad judiciary.He made the remarks while addressing newly recruited magistrates at the Sri Lanka Judges’ Institute on Wednesday. Chief Justice Surasena, who is due to retire in December upon reaching 65 years of age, noted that sovereignty has four major components – executive power, legislative power, judicial power and franchise. He stressed that what judges are exercising from the bench is the “judicial power of the people”.The people give that power to the judiciary for the benefit of the people, said the CJ, adding that this has to be borne in mind. “It is not by natural disasters alone that the country can be devastated and destroyed. A country can be destroyed by a bad judiciary also. A bad judiciary will destroy a country in a lesser amount of time. If that happens, no international donor or no international help will recover the country,” the CJ emphasised.High-profile casesWeek in and week out, much of the public attention is focused on the judiciary, where many a high-profile case comes up regularly. This week was no different with the case of former State Intelligence Service (SIS) Director Major General (Retired) Suresh Sallay coming up before Colombo Fort Magistrate Pasan Amarasena. The latest court hearing was a positive outcome for the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), which obtained a court order compelling Mr Sallay to provide the passwords to his mobile phone and laptop to the CID to facilitate further investigations. Mr Sallay had so far resisted attempts by the CID to obtain these passwords, but the court order may change that. The Court also rejected the request by Mr Sallay’s counsel to remove the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department, Shani Abeysekera, from the investigation. Mr Sallay’s family accuses the CID Director of being driven by a personal vendetta against the former SIS chief and subjecting him to inhumane and degrading treatment while in CID custody.In another development this week, Mr Sallay also called off his month-long hunger strike following advice by his legal counsel. He remains warded at the National Hospital in Colombo with several health complications. The fast ended after he was transferred to the Cardiology Unit of the Colombo National Hospital after suffering a sudden cardiac condition, following which he was persuaded to end the hunger strike.The former SIS chief was arrested by the CID on February 25 over allegations linked to the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings and remains in custody following detention orders under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).Another case that drew much attention this week is the one involving Rakitha Rajapakshe, the son of former Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, and former Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) Horana organiser Charith Abeysinghe. The two men were produced before the Colombo Chief Magistrate, Asanga Bodaragama, on Friday and further remanded until July 17. The order was made after the Colombo Chief Magistrate considered submissions made by officials of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) and counsel appearing for the suspects.The two men, along with the third suspect Aruna Sri Warushahennadige, a former executive director of Airport and Aviation Services (Sri Lanka) Limited (AASL), are suspected of soliciting and accepting a bribe from a woman by the name of Madhushika Madhuwanthi, who is said to be the wife of Nandun Chinthaka Wickramaratne, alias ‘Harak Kata’, in 2023 while in Dubai. Nadun Chintaka, a wanted criminal with alleged links to the drug trade, was arrested in Madagascar and extradited to Sri Lanka in March 2023. He faces multiple charges, including an attempt to escape from custody.The magistrate rejected the bail applications of the suspects, observing that no exceptional circumstances had been presented to justify the granting of bail. In representations made by the CIABOC to the court, it was alleged that Rakitha Rajapakshe, Charith Abeysinghe and Aruna Sri Warushahennadige had travelled to Dubai on the same flight on March 25, 2023, where they allegedly met Madushika Maduwanthi, the wife of ‘Harak Kata’, where they discussed the financial transaction.The case stems from an anonymous complaint received by the CIABOC on March 4, 2025, following which the investigations began. Among those interviewed by CIABOC officials as part of the initial investigation were Nandun Chinthaka, alias ‘Harak Kata’, who is being held under special security at the old Tangalle prison; Jayasekera Vithanage Ruwan Chamara, alias ‘Midigama Ruwan’, who is being held at the Navy prison at Welisara; and Herath Mudiyanselage Konagedera, alias ‘Herbie’. The Commission also obtained the relevant travel records from the Department of Immigration and Emigration to establish that the three suspects had travelled to Dubai during the time period when the interactions relating to the bribe took place.Prior to leaving Sri Lanka, Charith Abeysinghe had through his contacts arranged for the meeting with Madushika Maduwanthi. The meeting had taken place in the Dubai residence of Herath Mudiyanselage Konagedera, alias Herbie, who told investigators that he has been a resident in Dubai for many years and is engaged in business and that he had got to know Nandun Chintaka while he was there.The suspects allegedly demanded Rs 500 million, claiming they could influence official processes to prevent ‘Harak Kata’ from being killed while in custody, secure the removal of his detention orders, arrange his transfer from Boossa High-Security Prison to another correctional facility and facilitate his release from ongoing investigations. The CIABOC submissions revealed that while the initial demand was for Rs 500 million, it was later reduced to Rs 200 million, of which Rs 120 million was allegedly paid as an advance during the Dubai meeting. The suspects returned to Sri Lanka on March 29, 2023, the court was told. The money had been transferred to Sri Lanka through the Undiyal or Hawala system (an informal, illegal money transfer system) and had been used by the suspects to purchase vehicles and property.In its submissions, the CIABOC also alleged that Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, who was then the minister of justice, was in Dubai at the same time as his son when the interactions leading to the soliciting of money to influence a case took place. This allegation has now put the former minister also under investigations of the CIABOC, which wants to ascertain if there was a link between the father and son being in Dubai during the same period and if there was any connection between them being present in the same city at the same time.Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe and several others from the opposition visited former Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe’s residence this week to see how he was doing. During the discussion, Mr Wickremesinghe insisted that due process had been followed regarding ‘Harak Kata’, who had been arrested and brought to the country when Mr Wickremesinghe was president.“No one can interfere. It is entirely in the hands of the defence minister,” Mr Wickremesinghe had told those present. Pointing out that he was the defence minister as well, Mr Wickremesinghe had disclosed that documents related to that subject were also sent to the Presidential Secretariat for him to sign since the defence minister did not have a separate office. These documents included orders related to ‘Harak Kata’ as well. As such, the former president had claimed that neither Mr Rajapakshe nor anyone else could interfere in the matter, as alleged by authorities.“Furthermore, these people claim that Wijeyadasa provided protection to ‘Harak Kata’. I had stated that we must protect anyone taken into government custody. I had said that whether they are taken by the police or are inside prison, they must be protected, because otherwise, we will have to answer about human rights again,” the former president pointed out. He added that if Mr Rajapakshe had sent a letter requesting protection for ‘Harak Kata’, it should not have been an issue, as that was his duty. “He did his part. So, what is there to be done here now?”While further hearings into the case may throw up more interesting matters, investigations into corruption linked to the family of former president Mahinda Rajapaksa continue to take centre stage. On Friday, Sri Lanka’s senior-most navy officer, former Navy Commander Admiral of the Fleet Wasantha Karannagoda, was arrested by CIABOC over allegations of corruption linked to the recruitment of Yoshitha Rajapaksa to the Sri Lanka Navy in 2006. He was released on bail later in the day by Colombo Chief Magistrate Asanga Bodaragama on two sureties of Rs 2.5 million each. A foreign travel ban was also imposed on him.It is alleged that Yoshitha Rajapaksa was recruited as a cadet executive officer to the Sri Lanka Navy by-passing the standard recruitment procedure, and shortly afterward he was selected to attend the UK’s Royal Naval College in Dartmouth as a cadet officer. The cost for the overseas training for Yoshitha Rajapaksa was borne by the Sri Lanka Navy. The CIABOC alleged that Wasantha Karannagoda, who served as the Commander of the Navy at the time, had acted in a manner that amounts to an offence of corruption and was hence named a suspect in the case.The magistrate released Admiral Karannagoda on bail, stating that the mere fact that investigations are still ongoing is not by itself sufficient to justify remanding the suspect and that there was no material to suggest that the suspect had attempted to influence witnesses or interfere with the investigation and that the prosecution had failed to disclose sufficient grounds warranting his remand.Yoshitha Rajapaksa was arrested in relation to the same case on June 17, 2026, and later released on bail.Economic frontOn the economic front, the National People’s Power (NPP) government will no doubt be buoyed by positive developments on a number of fronts. The first followed the conclusion of yet another visit to Sri Lanka by a delegation from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) this week. The team was in the country from June 24 to 30 and met with government authorities and a broad range of stakeholders as it took stock of the recent economic situation and performance of the reform programme supported by the IMF’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) arrangement.The IMF delegation held meetings with President and Finance Minister Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya, Labour Minister and Deputy Finance and Planning Minister Anil Jayantha Fernando, Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) Governor Nandalal Weerasinghe, Treasury Secretary Harshana Suriyapperuma, the President’s Senior Economic Advisor Duminda Hulangamuwa, the President’s Chief Advisor on Digital Economy Hans Wijayasuriya, and other senior government and CBSL officials. The mission also met with representatives from the private sector, civil society organisations, and development partners.A statement issued by the President’s Media Division (PMD) following President Dissanayake’s meeting with the delegation claimed that the IMF “highly praised” the government’s stewardship of the economy. It added that the President had reiterated that his government remains fully committed to implementing the IMF programme, “not because of external pressure, but because it firmly believes that the reforms are essential to leading Sri Lanka out of economic hardship and building a stronger and more prosperous nation.” He had highlighted the adverse impact of external shocks, including the US tariffs, the devastation caused by Cyclone Ditwah and the conflict in the Middle East, all of which created disruptions and delays. Nevertheless, the president had noted that the government had acted swiftly to safeguard macroeconomic and social stability and continues to do everything possible to keep the country firmly on the path to recovery.The public assessment given by the IMF team at the conclusion of its visit also backed up the PMD’s statement, as the organisation commended the government for the steps it had taken to manage the economic situation in the wake of war breaking out in the Middle East.In a statement, IMF Mission Chief for Sri Lanka, Evan Papageorgiou, stressed that “staying the course” on the reform agenda remains critical to solidify Sri Lanka’s recovery and to preserve fiscal and external sustainability. He noted that following fiscal easing in 2026, the authorities are committed to reverting to the primary balance target of 2.3 per cent of GDP in 2027 to safeguard macroeconomic stability. “Efforts to improve tax compliance, broaden the tax base, and enhance public financial management, including by preventing the reemergence of expenditure arrears, should continue. Resolving bottlenecks to spending execution—including disaster-related support—is imperative for effective post-cyclone recovery and reconstruction. Accelerating the reform of state-owned enterprises and maintaining cost-recovery energy pricing are key to minimising fiscal risks. At the same time, the authorities should prioritise adequate targeting and coverage of social safety nets to protect vulnerable families,” said Mr Papageorgiou.With debt restructuring nearing completion, efforts at building the capacity of the Public Debt Management Office should be accelerated. Monetary policy, meanwhile, should remain “prudent, agile, and data-dependent” to safeguard price stability under heightened global uncertainty, the IMF mission chief said.“Building resilience to shocks and achieving strong, durable, and inclusive growth requires steadfast implementation of governance reforms. It also requires bold reforms to improve the efficiency and fairness of the tax system, liberalise trade, address labour market rigidities, and enhance the business environment to attract investment, create jobs, and bring poverty rates down,” Mr Papageorgiou stressed.Sri Lanka’s programme performance will be formally assessed in the context of the Seventh Review of the EFF, expected to take place in September.Meanwhile, the World Bank Group’s latest report on country income classifications saw Sri Lanka move up from lower-middle to upper-middle income status. Sri Lanka was among five countries to move up from lower-middle-income to upper-middle-income classification in the annual report, with the others being Jordan, Micronesia, the Philippines and Viet Nam. The World Bank Group classifies countries into four income groups: low, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high. The classifications are given according to gross national income (GNI) per capita estimates from the previous calendar year. This year’s edition covers 218 countries, and the results will serve as a global reference until the end of June 2027.“Sri Lanka is a story of recovery,” the report noted, in reference to why the country’s classification had been upgraded. “Just three years after a severe economic crisis brought the country to the brink of collapse in 2022, real GDP grew by 5% in 2025, driven by a rebound across industries and growth in financial and tourism services,” the report observed. The reclassification is a marker of resilience, it further said, while adding that the country only narrowly crossed the threshold.Some economists, however, have pointed out that the country has been in this position before. Sri Lanka was classified as an upper-middle-income country in 2019 but was again downgraded to lower-middle-income status the following year. Then came the economic crisis.Those in the opposition, including Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, have urged the government to quickly begin negotiations with the IMF on a successor programme for Sri Lanka once the current EFF arrangement ends in March 2027. This is on the grounds that Sri Lanka will find it extremely difficult to meet the IMF’s gross official reserves target when the current programme ends.The government, however, believes it is “too soon” to speak of a new IMF programme for Sri Lanka. Referring to the IMF statement, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism Minister Vijitha Herath said it reiterated the organisation’s confidence in Sri Lanka and approval of the government’s economic reform programme. “Not too long ago, those in the opposition were sounding alarm bells, insisting our government could not manage the economy and that the country was headed for an economic collapse similar to what happened in 2022, but look at what has happened,” he said. Minister Herath pointed to Sri Lanka being reclassified as upper-middle income by the World Bank as proof that the government’s efforts were bearing fruit despite the many challenges that Sri Lanka had encountered over the past 18 months the NPP had been in power.Minister Herath did not rule out seeking a new IMF programme but added any decision on it would have to be made next year, towards the end of the current programme, after a complete assessment of the situation is made.With regard to the government’s handling of the economy, a noteworthy development was the appointment of Presidential Economic Advisor Duminda Hulangamuwa as the new chairman of the Board of Investment (BoI), the apex agency for foreign direct investment in the country. The letters of appointment to Mr Hulangamuwa and other newly appointed members of the BoI were presented on Tuesday. Mr Hulangamuwa was also the country managing partner of Ernst & Young Sri Lanka and the Maldives. He retired from the post on the same day after a career spanning more than four decades with the global firm.Mr Hulangamuwa’s new appointment reinforces his position as one of the key professionals from the private sector that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has placed his trust in to help steer the country towards economic growth. There was even speculation last year that he was in line to be the Treasury Secretary following the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardena. The government, however, denied it had offered the job to Mr Hulangamuwa.SJB-UNP talksAs far as the opposition is concerned, there are indications that progress has been achieved in the so far troubled and unsuccessful attempts at a tie-up between the main opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and the UNP.There was cautious optimism among politicians from both parties as they attended the 250th anniversary celebrations of the United States at the US Embassy. Those in attendance included Sajith Premadasa, Kabir Hashim, Harsha De Silva and Thalatha Athukorale. During a discussion between some of the SJB and UNP politicians who were in attendance, all were in agreement that the two parties joining together was their best chance to defeat the NPP.One of those privy to the ongoing discussions said that the people will see the results of the fruitful talks between the two parties in about two months. There was also some light-hearted banter between the two sides when a senior politician from the SJB reminded his UNP colleague that the SJB’s head office in Ethul Kotte is located on rented property. “Let’s end these discussions soon so we can move back into a section of Sirikotha,” he told the UNP politico.
Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup 2026 - Round of 32 - United States v Bosnia and Herzegovina - San Francisco Bay Area Stadium, Santa Clara, California, U.S. - July 1, 2026 Folarin Balogun of the U.S. is shown a red card by referee Raphael Claus REUTERS/Phil Noble/File PhotoSoccer-Trump calls Balogun red card U-turn a 'brilliant decision', UEFA says FIFA 'crossed a red line'By Reuters July 6, 2026SummaryTrump calls FIFA decision to allow Balogun to play 'brilliant'FIFA keeps Balogun's red card but suspends one-match ban for one yearBelgian Football Association to challenge player's eligibilityBalogun had scored three goals for the United States before his Bosnia red cardWASHINGTON, July 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump on Monday said FIFA's move to suspend U.S. striker Folarin Balogun's red-card ban at the World Cup was a "brilliant decision" after he personally contacted global soccer boss Gianni Infantino on the matter, but European soccer body UEFA said FIFA had "crossed a red line".The affair has thrown a spotlight on FIFA's disciplinary process and prompted the Belgians, who play the U.S. later on Monday for a place in the quarter-finals, to challenge Balogun's eligibility for the match. The player was sent off for a tackle during the U.S.' win over Bosnia and Herzegovina, a punishment that usually carries an automatic one-match ban.Trump, speaking in the Oval Office, said he had contacted Infantino to ask him for a review of the case."He (Balogun) didn't do anything wrong and he is our best player," Trump said. "When they take your best player and say 'You can't play' it's very unfair.""I think they made a really brilliant decision," Trump said. "I asked for a review. If they would not allow a top player to play I think it (the World Cup) would have had a big stain. I related that feeling."The incident has rapidly become the tournament's biggest talking point, overshadowing tactics and team selection and instead putting the focus on the relations between sport and political power."We express our disbelief at such an unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable decision," UEFA said on Monday, adding that: "Yesterday's decision ... crossed a red line"."When the certainty of rules is no longer guaranteed by its guardians, the integrity of the game is at stake and the credibility of a competition is undermined."Several national football federations have been equally critical of FIFA's decision."It is fundamental that the existing regulations are predictable, transparent, and equal for everyone. If a red card, which normally leads to a suspension, is then postponed in the middle of an ongoing championship without clarity as to why and how the regulations should apply, we find that very problematic," Swedish Football Association President Simon Astrom told TT.ELIGIBILITY CHALLENGEThe Royal Belgian Football Association said it was challenging FIFA's decision to declare Balogun eligible to play on Monday."The RBFA has still not received any decision or any explanation from FIFA regarding this matter," it said in a statement."Regardless of the sporting outcome of this match, the RBFA is deeply concerned by the course of events and will continue to fight in the coming hours, days and months in defence of the fundamental principles of ethics, fair competition, and the interests of football as a whole."The high-profile criticism also echoed that from some big names in the sport."This is our sport, not theirs," said former Liverpool boss Juergen Klopp, in talks to become the new Germany coach."If Donald Trump and Gianni Infantino really sorted this out between themselves, it is madness; it calls everything into question. These two people, who know nothing about football, should have absolutely nothing to do with this."As criticism spilled over into the political sphere, the European Commissioner for Sport warned against "the weaponisation of sport for political purposes."Within minutes, Sunday's decision to suspend the ban was dominating sports bulletins and talk shows as pundits, commentators and former players argued over whether FIFA had upheld justice or undermined its own rules.FIFA did not respond to Reuters' requests for comment about the decision and Trump's call with Infantino.It is not the first time this year that FIFA has been accused of mixing politics with sport, with FIFA boss Infantino attending President Trump's Board of Peace meeting in February and facing subsequent questions about the body's political neutrality.'GREAT INJUSTICE'Balogun, who has scored three goals for the U.S. in the tournament, was sent off after a VAR review for dragging his cleats down the back of defender Tarik Muharemovic's leg and onto his foot during their win over Bosnia and Herzegovina in the round of 32.The red card carried an automatic one-match ban, ruling Balogun out of Monday's tie with Belgium. FIFA instead suspended the ban for a one-year probationary period without rescinding the card itself.Trump thanked FIFA on Truth Social "for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice," while the White House celebrated Balogun's reinstatement with a post on X saying: "USA-USA-USA."England manager Thomas Tuchel questioned the decision, having just seen his defender Jarell Quansah get sent off in his side's 3-2 last-16 win over Mexico."Who overturns this decision then and when? And on what grounds? How far does this go now? This is strange for me," Tuchel told reporters at the Azteca Stadium.Even former FIFA boss Sepp Blatter, who stepped down in 2015 amid corruption allegations, joined the criticism."Red cards are not overturned by political phone calls. They are overturned by rules, evidence and independent bodies," he said. "If a U.S. President intervenes with the FIFA President — and a player is suddenly cleared before a World Cup knockout match — the question is unavoidable: Quo vadis, FIFA? Football must never become a playground for political power."Writing by Karolos Grohmann; Editing by Hugh Lawson
