How UEFA President Ceferin could extend his time in office

It's amazing how much a person's perspective can change in just a few years.

In 2017, a year after Aleksander Ceferin was first elected president of UEFA, European football's governing body, the Slovenian initiated a package of reforms to the organization — including a limit of three four-year terms on the office he continues to hold.

"These changes are essential if we are to rebuild our image, restore our credibility and strengthen our legitimacy," Ceferin said at the time.

When is a term a term?

Until recently, the consensus was that due to the limits he championed seven years ago, the now 56-year-old will have to step aside after his current term ends in 2027. However, the Slovenian doesn't see things that way at all.

He argues that his first term in office doesn't count as during that period, from 2016 to 2019, he was serving out the remaining term of his predecessor, Michel Platini. The Frenchman had been forced out of office after FIFA banned both him and then-FIFA President Sepp Blatter from all football-related activities over a corruption scandal.

This is why delegates at Thursday's UEFA Congress in Paris are to vote on an amendment that would reset the start of Ceferin's time in office to his 2019 reelection — and pave the way for him to run again in 2027.

German backing for Ceferin

The amendment is expected to pass with little or no dissent. The only significant opposition has come from UEFA's former chief of football, Zvonimir Boban, who spoke out against the proposal two weeks ago. The former Croatia and AC Milan midfielder, a longtime supporter of Ceferin, said his "total disapproval" of the change had left him with "no option but to leave." UEFA described Boban's departure as being by "mutual consent." While Boban said he was not alone in his thinking, there has been no notable public support for his position — in stark contrast to Ceferin's.

DFB (German Football Association) President Bernd Neuendorf is among those who have expressed support for the UEFA boss' intention. Neuendorf said the DFB had an "excellent relationship" with Ceferin, noting that they had worked "incredibly closely and in a spirit of trust" in advance of next summer's men's Euros, which are to be hosted by Germany.

FIFA boss Infantino's example

Ceferin's move to allow himself to remain in office longer bears a striking resemblance to Gianni Infantino's approach. The president of the world governing body, FIFA, also came to power as a result of the 2015 corruption scandal — first winning election in early 2016 to serve out the last three years of banned FIFA boss Blatter's term. Like Ceferin, Infantino was subsequently reelected twice — also unopposed. One of the results of the 2015 scandal saw FIFA pass reforms, including a three-term limit on any of its presidents.

However, in 2022, Infantino got the FIFA Council to confirm that his first three years didn't count. This means that Infantino could remain in office until 2031 – assuming he wins the next election.

Could IOC President Bach follow suit?

According to the Olympic Charter, the current president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will have to leave office in 2025 — after serving 12 years as the most powerful man in sport. The IOC adopted a three-term limit in 2012. This, too, had been triggered by a corruption scandal. At least 24 IOC members were found to have taken bribes linked to Salt Lake City's successful bid to host the 2002 Winter Games.  

Nevertheless, at the IOC Congress in Mumbai last October, several IOC delegates raised the possibility of amending the Charter to allow Bach to serve a fourth term in office. The IOC president subsequently stated that a growing number of IOC members had expressed support for the idea. The 70-year-old German, however, has yet to reveal whether he would be willing to stay on.

A key factor that Ceferin, Infantino and Bach have in common is that they face no significant opposition within the organizations they lead. The vast majority of people at UEFA, FIFA and the IOC appear to be happy with the men at the top. Two of the options for what this means are that all three have been doing their jobs well or that, by approving changes to allow them to stay beyond the term limits, there is a lack of democratic awareness and critical spirit within their organizations.

This article was translated from German.

Edited by: Jonathan Harding