Soetan raises conflict-of-interest concerns in AFN governance
The Athletics Federation of Nigeria (AFN) is facing mounting scrutiny over governance lapses that insiders warn could trigger sanctions from World Athletics.
At the heart of the controversy is what stakeholders describe as an unusual concentration of authority in one individual who simultaneously holds multiple overlapping roles across government and federation structures.
Olalekan Soetan, Southwest Zonal Representative and member of the AFN Technical Committee, has sounded the alarm, describing the situation as ‘structurally unsafe’ and a direct violation of World Athletics’ Governance Rules (2019).
According to Soetan, the individual in question is an active staff member of the National Sports Commission (NSC), serves as the NSC’s nominee on the AFN Board, is the elected AFN Second Vice President, chairs the AFN Road Race Commission, and sits on the NSC Podium/High Performance Commission.
He argues that no modern federation in Africa or elsewhere under World Athletics allows such a concentration of authority in one person, warning that it undermines autonomy and integrity.
World Athletics’ Governance Rules are clear on this matter. Rule 3.1 states: ‘Each Member must remain autonomous and resist political, religious, or commercial interference. Members must ensure that their executive bodies are free from conflicts of interest and undue influence.’
Rule 4.2 adds: ‘No individual shall simultaneously hold positions that compromise neutrality or create conflicts between government and federation authority.’
By allowing one person to control race sanctioning, World Athletics Label compliance, foreign athlete approvals, technical delegate selection, anti-doping oversight, and high-performance structures, Nigeria’s athletics governance risks breaching these standards.
Soetan warns this amounts to ‘regulatory capture,’ where selective sanctioning and overlapping interests could distort policy, compromise revenue flows, and weaken athlete development pathways.
The governance debate is compounded by internal politics. The AFN’s First Vice President, from the North West region, has reportedly been relegated to the margins of federation affairs, with stakeholders alleging ethnic bias in the sidelining.
Meanwhile, controversy continues to swirl around the Second Vice President’s nomination. Reports from SportsNow after the board elections suggested she did not meet any of the three eligibility criteria outlined in the AFN constitution, raising questions about compliance and legitimacy.
Soetan insists the risks are not hypothetical. He points to precedents where World Athletics has suspended or reprimanded federations worldwide for similar breaches.
Rule 5.1 empowers the global body to conduct compliance reviews and governance interventions when member federations show signs of compromised independence. Nigeria, he cautions, could face sanctions, loss of credibility, or even suspension from race sanctioning processes if urgent reforms are not implemented.
‘This is not about personalities,’ Soetan stressed. ‘It is about protecting the AFN, protecting athletes, and safeguarding Nigeria’s standing under World Athletics governance rules.’
He called for immediate safeguards, including separation of government and federation roles, redistribution of commission responsibilities, strict conflict-of-interest protocols, transparent appointments, and regular governance audits.
