Cas upholds Algerian appeal in row over map of Morocco
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) has upheld an appeal by the Algerian Football Federation (Faf) against the decision to allow a Moroccan club to wear a shirt with an extended map of the country.
The Confederation of African Football (Caf) had approved RS Berkane's kit to be worn in continental competition despite the fact the map included the disputed territory of Western Sahara.
The design is seen as a political provocation in Algeria, and caused a row which saw both legs of last season's Caf Confederation Cup semi-final tie between Berkane and Algerian club USM Alger called off.
A Caf disciplinary committee awarded Berkane two 3-0 victories, and Caf subsequently dismissed an appeal from USM Alger.
The Algerian club and Faf took the case to Cas, which has ruled that the shirts are contrary to Caf regulations and the laws of world governing body Fifa and annulled the decision by the Caf appeals body to maintain the approval of the shirts.
USM Alger hailed a "well-deserved victory" that "enhances the team's rights and supports the principles of sports justice" in a post on social media.
Caf has been contacted for comment.
Match off after row over map of Morocco on shirt
Second football game called off in Morocco map row
Cas determined that the extended map on Berkane's shirt depicts "a message, a demonstration or propaganda of a political nature" as it represents "the assertion of a territorial dispute that is contested and still unresolved".
The Lausanne-based body also stated that, under Caf's regulations and Fifa laws, it is prohibited to convey any content of a political nature on all equipment.
The Cas decision included the assertion that Caf "is bound to respect and implement the duty of political neutrality".
The decision will have no bearing on the outcome of the 2023-24 Confederation Cup, which was won by Egyptian club Zamalek after Berkane received their walkover to the final.
USM Alger and Berkane could meet again in the semi-finals of this season's competition.
Algeria and Morocco share a nearly 2,000 km (1,242 miles) border, which has been a source of tension since independence from French colonial rule.
Diplomatic relations between the two countries are also frosty and the long-running dispute about Western Sahara, a sparsely-populated territory annexed by Morocco in 1975, has also strained relations.
Its indigenous Sahrawi people, led by the Polisario Front and with a government in exile in Algeria, mounted a 16-year-long insurgency that ended with a United Nations-brokered truce in 1991.
The extended map of Morocco including the territory of Western Sahara does not correspond to official cartography of the country as published by the UN.
Berkane had their shirts confiscated by customs officials on arrival in Algeria for the first leg of their Confederation Cup clash last April and refused to wear an alternative shirt.
USM Alger declined to take to the pitch in the second leg in Morocco.
The extended map has also caused issues in other sports, as Algeria withdrew from the Arab Youth Handball Championship last year because the Moroccan side were "wearing shirts with political connotations".
Western Sahara profile
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
32 minutes ago
- New York Post
LA-based Jimmy Kimmel claims ‘there's no riot outside' as he blasts ‘mentally ill' Trump
Los Angeles-based comedian Jimmy Kimmel told his audience on Tuesday that 'there's no riots outside' and slammed 'mentally ill' President Donald Trump for deploying troops to quell what he claims is exaggerated unrest in the city. Trump sent over 700 Marines to Los Angeles in an effort to quash anti-ICE protests that have ravaged parts of the city on Tuesday. Images from L.A. showcase masked protesters blocking roads, destroying vehicles and engaging with police, while Mayor Karen Bass issued a curfew for a portion of the city's downtown area. Advertisement Kimmel mocked the media for portraying the anti-ICE protests as 'some kind of totalitarian hellscape' and condemned the Trump administration for deporting 'people who have lived here their whole lives.' 'You won't see this elsewhere on television. Not only is it not an apocalypse, they're having a Disney/Pixar movie premiere for 'Elio,' a movie about aliens. Don't tell Trump — he'll send in the Green Berets, too,' Kimmel ribbed. 'But I just want to say, thank God for President Trump and the heroes at ICE for protecting us from these bloodthirsty fruit stand vendors spreading their dangerous pineapple chunks and mangos with a squirt of lime all over the city.' 4 Kimmel mocked the media for portraying the anti-ICE protests as 'some kind of totalitarian hellscape.' ABC 4 Cars burn during a protest against federal immigration sweeps in downtown Los Angeles, California, U.S. June 8, 2025. REUTERS Advertisement The late-night host vented his anger towards the ICE raids in the city, claiming that the 'vast majority' of those being deported have 'never done anything wrong.' 'People who have lived here their whole lives, people who have been in this city longer than I have, the vast majority of whom have never done anything wrong, are being abducted, which is the correct word to use, by agents in masks, hiding their identities, grabbing people off the street and at work, sending people to detention centers,' he claimed. Kimmel asserted that it's not only Los Angelenos' right to protest the deportations, but it's their 'responsibility.' 4 U.S. President Donald Trump walks away after speaking to the media upon arrival at Joint Base Andrews following a visit to North Carolina, in Maryland, U.S., June 10, 2025. REUTERS Advertisement 'Los Angelenos gathered to demonstrate and, with very few exceptions, peacefully demonstrate to voice their opposition to this disgusting and unnecessary abuse of power instigated by our mentally ill president, who is dead-set on exacerbating this, who actually wants conflict, who is intentionally inflaming and lying to make it seem like there's a war going on,' he charged. Kimmel continued his criticism of the president and claimed that 'he wants there to be a war going on' in L.A. and doesn't care who gets hurt in the process. 'There's no riot outside,' Kimmel declared. 'We have more so-called 'unrest' here when one of our teams wins a championship.' 4 A protestor is detained in downtown Los Angeles, Sunday, June 8, 2025, following last night's immigration raid protest. AP Advertisement The host maintained that the media is exaggerating the violence taking place at the anti-ICE protests and argued that Trump exacerbated the unrest by sending in troops. 'Someone sets a fire in a garbage can, 12 camera crews go running toward it,' he asserted. 'Trump wants it to seem like anarchy, so he goes around our governor and calls in 4,000 troops from the National Guard and 700 active-duty Marines. When we had the wildfires that devastated big chunks of our city, he did absolutely nothing. Now that we're in the middle of a non-emergency, send in the National Guard!'
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge sides with city of Austin in lawsuit involving former American-Statesman site
A judge this week ruled in favor of the city of Austin in a case involving the former American-Statesman site just south of downtown along Lady Bird Lake. The ruling denied a motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit filed by the Save Our Springs Alliance, an environmental watchdog group. The lawsuit alleged that the Austin City Council violated key provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act in 2022 when it approved a special type of zoning known as a planned unit development, or PUD, for the former Statesman site. The lawsuit sought to void the council's Dec. 2, 2022 vote to approve the PUD, based on the alleged open meetings violations. The Statesman moved several years ago from the site at 305 S. Congress Ave. to a new location near the airport. In arguing their case before District Judge Jan Soifer on May 15, Save Our Springs attorneys Bobby Levinski and Bill Bunch contended that the council granted the PUD zoning in violation of two key mandates of the Texas Open Meetings Act: proper public notice, and a reasonable opportunity for the public to speak before the vote was taken. Levinski said today that the Save Our Springs Alliance might appeal the ruling. "Given the importance of this case for governmental transparency and proper enforcement of the Texas Open Meetings Act, we'll be evaluating our options for appeal," Levinski said. "This case ultimately impacts the ability of residents to weigh in on important matters that affect their community, including the relocation of the Hike and Bike Trail and removal of the natural, tree-lined aesthetic of the Lady Bird Lake shoreline. Every case has its challenges, and we may need to work on it a little longer to ultimately prevail." More: Lawsuit seeks to halt planned redevelopment of former Statesman site on Lady Bird Lake Casey Dobson and Sara Wilder Clark represented the landowner, the Cox family of Atlanta, along with Austin-based Endeavor Real Estate Group. The Cox family hired Endeavor several years ago to create plans to redevelop the prime waterfront site. The site formerly housed the newspaper offices and printing plant. Cox sold the Statesman but retained ownership of the 18.9-acre site, a property many developers had long coveted and said was ripe for new development. Dobson did not immediately respond to an email for comment about the ruling and what it means for future plans to transform the property into a mixed-use project with high-rise buildings and other uses, which could include housing, office and retail development. Richard Suttle Jr., an Austin attorney and the spokesperson for the planned redevelopment, said he hasn't seen a final judgment yet in the case, so couldn't comment on what it might mean for the future planned redevelopment. Dan Richards represented the city in the lawsuit. Richards said Soifer's ruling, signed Monday, means "the trial court case is basically over." At last month's hearing, Richards told Soifer that voiding the PUD could jeopardize the developer's ability, in the current economic climate, to secure a new amendment offering the same level of community benefits — such as 6.5 acres of green space — at the site. At the same hearing, Dobson and Wilder Clark said the PUD zoning change was properly noticed, and the public was given sufficient opportunity to speak at nine different meetings. However, Levinski said that, while the PUD was listed on the council agenda as a zoning item, that posting was misleading because it failed to provide "full disclosure of the subjects to be discussed." The proposed PUD ordinance encompassed "numerous provisions that extend well beyond traditional zoning regulations," Levinski told Soifer. Those included "sweeping changes" to environmental protections and other city land-use codes, including a failure to disclose height limits, setbacks and the elimination of two restrictive covenants. "There are so many different parts of this (PUD) ordinance that are not zoning, yet it was sold to public as a rezoning," Levinski said. The zoning changes included modifications to the Lady Bird Lake shoreline; the relocation of the Ann and Roy Butler Hike and Bike Trail inland away from the lake; the removal of more than 90 mature trees; code waivers; and "amendments to almost every chapter of Austin's land development code," Levinski told Soifer. In arguing their case before Soifer, Leviniski and Bunch said that the Texas Open Meetings Act requires a public notice identifying these major changes to city standards and a public 'right to speak' on them before council granted the approvals. The Cox owners and Endeavor have the right to build high-rises — up to 725 feet tall — within 140 feet of Lady Bird Lake. The development would be "forever exempt from a plethora of water quality, parkland and lakeshore rules and regulations," according to the Save Our Springs Alliance. "The key here is the Statesman PUD went beyond zoning," Levinski said. "This didn't give sufficient notice to the public to say what is occurring with this zoning." Among other issues, he said the PUD included "non-zoning provisions, including items the council doesn't have authority over." There was a way the city could have described with greater detail what was occurring with the zoning case, "but they chose not to, and it's deceptive that they chose not to," Levinski said. The level of specificity "gets enhanced" when the issue involves matters of "significant public interest," Levinski said. "It's not enough to rely on the assumption that the general public may have knowledge of the subject matter." Dobson and Wilder Clark, however, told Soifer that the public notices complied with the Texas Open Meetings Act. The notices properly and adequately disclosed the subject of the PUD at various meetings on the council's printed public agenda, Dobson and Wilder Clark said. Moreover, all the details that Save Our Springs claims were lacking from the notice were available at "the click of a link" in backup materials on the council's online agenda, Wilder Clark said. "Not only did (the public) get to talk in meetings, but they got to submit written testimony," Wilder Clark said. She also noted that the council postponed meetings on the case. Showing slides of newspaper articles, Dobson said the proposed redevelopment of the Statesman site was front-page news. He said the case was "noticed out of the wazoo." "(Opponents) think this was done in the dark of night, with adequate notice to nobody," Dobson said. "In fact, the polar opposite happened." Dobson said no special notice was required, and opponents "didn't need it. They wrote letters, they spoke at length to (the city) Planning Commission and City Council. This did not take place under the shroud of secrecy," Dobson said. Countering the city's arguments, Bunch said the city "invented out of whole cloth" its position that it upheld the open meetings act, saying "there's no support for that in the entire body of open meetings cases." Early in the hearing, Dobson showed a photo of the current Statesman site "in all its glory," showing a low-slung building surrounded by a near vacant parking lot with lots of asphalt and concrete. Attorneys for the city and the developer stated that "virtually no one" opposes the proposed development, which may include condominiums, apartments, a hotel, office space and retail areas. Noting the site's popularity as a prime location for viewing the famed bat colony under the Ann Richards Congress Avenue Bridge, they emphasized the new development will enhance the bat viewing area. Additionally, they said the project has the support of bat conservation groups. Last year, the Save Our Springs Alliance won a lawsuit contesting the city's creation of a special financing district, a so-called tax increment reinvestment zone, to fund infrastructure improvements within the proposed Statesman redevelopment project. A judge ruled that financing method unlawful. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Judge rules for city in case involving former Statesman site
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
France Moves to Curb ‘Ultra-fast' Fashion With Bill Targeting Shein and Temu
PARIS — As major brands scale back their sustainability initiatives, France is pressing ahead with legislation aimed at reining in 'ultra-fast fashion' platforms such as Shein and Temu, known for their extremely low-cost clothing. The bill, introduced by Anne-Cécile Violland, a member of parliament from the Horizons party, passed the Senate one year after clearing the lower house of the French Assembly. More from WWD Inditex Sales Slow as Economic Headwinds Hit the High Street Rebag Expands Access to Pre-loved Luxury Goods With New Amazon Collaboration Designer Vincent Van Duysen Opens Antwerp Home for Zara Home+ 4th Collection The unusually long gap between votes led to some watering down of the original provisions, exempting traditional fast-fashion players such as H&M, Primark, and Inditex-owned Zara. 'It's a relief that it moved forward, but there has been a shift in the goal of the legislation that it is now specifically targeting what is called 'ultra-fast fashion,'' said Pierre Condamine, spokesperson for the Anti Fast Fashion Coalition, an umbrella group of 11 environmental organizations in France. Earlier drafts had adopted a broader definition of fast fashion that included Europe-based brands. 'There is sort of a shift in what was supposed to be an environmental legislation, with the objective to shift the whole sector towards sustainable practices, while now it's sort of becoming a protectionist text,' he told WWD. The revised bill targets ultra-fast fashion directly, proposing a tax on small parcels shipped from outside the EU ranging from 2 to 4 euros per package. The fee is intended to slow the influx of packages from Chinese platforms to France, in a move reminiscent of the U.S. ending its de minimis exemption. Shein and Temu together shipped 800 million packages to France in 2024 — more than half of all parcels sent to the country. The French government will first notify the European Commission, as several measures, including a total advertising ban on ultra-fast-fashion platforms, require approval at the EU level. This process could take up to three months before the bill goes to the Assembly and Senate joint committee for resolution, likely in the fall in late September or October. Several key provisions may face scrutiny in Brussels, including the parcel fee, which could conflict with the European Commission's plan for a bloc-wide fee by 2028, and the proposed national advertising ban. Although Shein is registered in Singapore, its European headquarters in Ireland could present a legal loophole. As it stands, the bill mandates eco-contributions from fashion companies based on a 'bonus-malus' system — rewarding sustainable practices and penalizing environmental harm. Penalties could rise to 10 euros per item by 2030, though the methodology for valuing items has yet to be defined. The bill would also eliminate tax advantages for 'donating' unsold stock by ultra-fast-fashion brands, which are not permitted to destroy unsold items under an anti-waste law passed in 2020. A critical element of the bill is its specific definition of 'ultra-fast' or 'ultra-express' fashion. This distinction leaves out more traditional fast-fashion companies that have a retail presence like H&M, Primark and Zara. By differentiating between ultra-fast platforms and fast-fashion brands with physical retail locations, the legislation potentially creates a loophole for companies headquartered in Europe — Sweden, Ireland and Spain respectively — even though their production relies heavily on low-wage countries like China, India and Bangladesh via subcontractors and diffuse supply chains. The original bill passed by the Assembly featured the broader definition, but companies lobbied intensively over the past year for the narrower language, arguing that they contribute to local employment. Senator Sylvie Valente Le Hir of Les Républicains, who ushered the bill through the Senate, highlighted its targeted approach: 'We have drawn a clear line between those we want to regulate — ultra-express fashion — and those we want to preserve, accessible but rooted fashion, which employs in France, which structures our territories, which creates links and supports a local economic fabric,' she said. The industry group La Fédération Française du Prêt à Porter Féminin praised the bill as a 'step forward' in tackling ultra-fast fashion. 'It formalizes the long-standing collective commitment of many stakeholders to defend a fashion industry that respects workers, consumers, citizens, French businesses, and the planet,' the organization said in a statement. However, Condamine noted that while large global fast-fashion retailers remain profitable – Zara's parent company Inditex reported sales were up 4.2 percent in constant-currency in the first quarter on Wednesday — French high street brands like Camaieu and NafNaf have entered administration, and independent stores continue to shutter. 'The economic crisis in the clothing industry in France, it started way before Shein,' Condamine said. 'It started when fast fashion — Zara, H&M, Primark — arrived. Now they are saying if they're targeted, it will be a catastrophe [for jobs]. But they're doing great economically, and they're part of the problem.' Some lawmakers described the bill as a 'strong first signal' and indicated that fast fashion as a whole — including the European players with physical presence — could face future regulation due to unsustainable business practices. On the other hand, critics — chiefly Shein — have said the legislation punishes cost-conscious consumers and lower-income households. The company, which markets itself under the slogan 'Fashion is a right, not a privilege,' has staged events in French cities like Béziers. On Sunday, its director of government relations, Fabrice Layer, held a presentation in front of the southeastern town's city hall to rally public support for the company. 'We ultimately find ourselves with a law that is not only anti-Shein, but anti-Shein customer,' Quentin Ruffat, Shein's spokesperson in France, told AFP. 'This law, if passed, will directly penalize our customers' wallets and drastically reduce their purchasing power.' The company has also accused France's fashion establishment of protecting legacy brands and says it will continue lobbying to amend the bill further. Shein representatives did not respond to requests for comment. New research from l'Institut Français de la Mode (IFM) shows that in the first quarter of 2025, Amazon, Shein and Temu together accounted for 24 percent of online apparel sales by value, representing 7 percent of total apparel consumption across all channels. Online sales made up 29.4 percent of apparel purchases by value, including the online stores of traditional retailers. Best of WWD Walmart Calls California Waste Dumping Lawsuit 'Unjustified' Year in Review: Sustainability's Biggest Controversies of 2021 Year in Review: Sustainability's New Strides
