The Jack Warner Thread.

[Tallman]

Warner: I'm paying a price for the best World Cup ever
By Sean Douglas (T&T Newsday)

FORMER FIFA vice president Jack Warner hailed Argentina's World Cup victory on Sunday and said the tournament was so successful that he was clearly vindicated over its award to Qatar.

He spoke to Newsday an hour after Argentina beat France in the finals, 4-2 on penalties, after a 3-3 tie after extra time.

In 2010, Fifa's executive committee voted 14-8 for Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup – ahead of bids by the US, South Korea, Japan and Australia – and for Russia to host the 2018 tournament ahead of England, Spain-Portugal and Holland-Belgium.

Some voices in the international media criticised the choice of Qatar, complaining it was a small nation of two million people, located in the Middle East, and lacking a long history of football.

Concerns were raised about the hot climate, a ban on alcohol in stadia, LGBT rights and lack of football infrastructure.

Amid allegations of Qatari bribes for hosting rights, the US Department of Justice indicted Warner in 2015 on allegations of wire fraud, racketeering and money laundering, and is seeking to extradite him. Qatar World Cup organisers and Warner have denied any wrongdoing, instead claiming sour grapes by the US for not getting to host the 2022 tournament.

As the World Cup ended dramatically on Sunday, there have been rave reviews as fans enjoyed a month of upsets, exciting matches, underdogs succeeding and classic goals.

Warner said his decision to support Qatar's bid had been proven right, but he was personally now paying a high price for it.

"All I'm prepared to say is although I contributed to having the World Cup in Qatar – for which I've paid a very dear price today – nobody stood up for my defence and said I did the correct thing.

"The football tournament has justified that what I did was correct. The World Cup has to be expanded to other areas besides Europe and South America.

"I have been pilloried for that and have been victimised and am paying a price before the courts.

"I stand by my decision. I want to say it was the best World Cup FIFA has had in its history. I want to congratulate Argentina, but also equally (Lionel) Messi (Argentina captain) and (Kylian) Mbappe (Golden Boot winner)."

Why was it the best World Cup ever?

Warner said, "In terms of the quality of the matches, the fact it was incident-free, the fact that the standard of refereeing was very high, and at the end of the day it also exposed some of the emerging countries like Croatia (four million population) and Morocco (World Cup semifinalists). They were exposed to a high level of football.

"I feel, all in all, the winner of this World Cup is football."

Warner delved further into the decision to award Qatar hosting rights.

"The World Cup has never gone to a Muslim country or an Arab country in its history. I felt the time had come for an Arab country to be given the World Cup, and not only an Arab country but one of the richest Arab countries today. They can do it more than another person can.

"So I was strong in my belief, it was the correct thing to do.

"I want to repeat: today both the US and UK have me pay a price for that decision, but I stand by it.

"A lot of people have been calling me now to congratulate me. A lot. Hundreds of people have been calling to congratulate me.

"But I don't recall any of them standing for me publicly when I was being pilloried by the powers that be."

[Tallman]

Jack is going nowhere - Extradition on hold
By Donstan Bonn (T&T Express)

Former FIFA vice-president Austin 'Jack' Warner received a lifeline on his extradition to the United States of America, to stand trial for alleged criminal offences, when the Magistrate’s Court ruled on Monday that the questions raised by Warner in an application pursuant to Section 14 (4) of the Constitution, should be determined by the High Court.

Following a Privy Council judgment on November 17 last year, which ruled against Warner’s case for his extradition to the US be denied on the grounds of violation of his constitutional rights and procedural unfairness, he filed an application with the local court in keeping with Section 14 (4), which states, “where in any proceeding in any court other than the High Court or the Court of Appeal, any question arises as to the contravention of any of the provisions of this chapter, the person presiding in that court (Magistrates Court) may and shall give the party or any party to the proceeding so request, refer the question to the High Court unless in his opinion the raising of the question is merely frivolous or vexatious.”

Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, noted this section of the Constitution provides a corridor of opportunity which allows to a person in the circumstances of Warner, to get access to due process even after an applicant like Warner has been before the High Court, Court of Appeal, and before the Privy Council and lost in all instances as was the case with Warner.

Armour, who was speaking during a press conference on Monday, noted that following the Privy Council’s judgment on November 17, Warner raised a number of questions in a judicial review application.

“Two of the arguments which were raised by Warner at the Privy Council were arguments known as the specialty arguments-a particular process under extradition proceedings, which is to say that the Attorney General of the State from whom extradition is requested, will sign off on a certificate and will authorize the authority to proceed for the extradition proceedings to continue according to law,” Armour said

He said Warner’s position was that the specialty argument had been violated in that there was no consistency between the offences for which the United States of America wished to extradite him, consistent with the laws of Trinidad and Tobago, because of different arrangements between the treaty to which the United States is party and the domestic law of Trinidad and Tobago, the Extradition Act.

“That specialty argument failed and the certificate by which Warner’s extradition would arise, was upheld by the Privy Council in its ruling on November 17, and the Privy Council ruled that the extradition on that ground, could proceed.”

He said another argument Warner had raised before Justice (James) Aboud, which failed at the High Court, Court of Appeal and at the Privy Council, was that he had not been given rights of fair procedure.

“Subsequent to the decision of the Privy Council, Warner proceeded to file his application pursuant to Section 14 (4) of the Constitution on March 3, and he listed a number of questions which had to do with the fact that his rights under the Constitution have been violated by the continued efforts of the United States as the requesting State, to have the Government of Trinidad and Tobago extradite him to the USA to stand trial there.

“That application was supported by an affidavit of Mr Warner. There was no other evidence on that application. No other parties filed any evidence, and really, the question as set out in Section 14 (4), was whether Mr Warner had raised issues that required the High Court to address a violation of his constitution rights in accordance with due process.”

Armour said the only basis on which the Chief magistrate could have declined to accede to Warner’s application was if she found that the arguments raised by Warner were frivolous and vexatious.

“This morning, the Chief magistrate ruled that the questions were not frivolous and vexatious in respect of Mr Warner’s complaint on the specialty argument, on procedural unfairness, and therefore she has referred those questions to the High Court for the High Court to determine the constitutionality of the request of the United States of America, to extradite Mr Warner to the United States to stand trial on a number of serious criminal offences.

“The Chief Magistrate went on to make findings of facts which disturbed me, and I say that with all due respect, because all that was before her was the affidavit of Mr Warner, and no evidence from any of the parties and no cross examination of anybody at all. And I’ve been in touch since the decision was handed down this morning, with the legal teams representing the Attorney General and the United States of America.”

He noted that he has spoken with Pamela Elder, SC, one of the lead counsels for the State, and she gave the assurance that she will be meeting with the legal team to review, with some concern, the decision of the Chief Magistrate in so far as it appears there’s justification for the findings of fact which the Chief Magistrate permitted herself to arrive at.

Armour said following the meeting of the legal team, he will meet with them to solicit advice on the steps the Government must take to continue to insist on all persons coming before the court so that justice could be done, to continue to adhere to due process, and in due course, to get the full determination of the High Court, the Supreme Court of Trinidad and Tobago, on Warner’s several applications.

On May 27, 2015, the United States requested the extradition of Warner to face corruption charges. Following his defeat at the Privy Council, Warner vowed to continue fighting the extradition request.

[Tallman]

Magistrate puts Warner's extradition on hold, slams ex-AG
By Jada Loutoo (T&T Newsday)

Former FIFA vice president Jack Warner will be allowed to take his latest legal challenge to the High Court in his battle against extradition to the US to face a multiplicity of corruption-related charges.

In a ruling on Monday, Chief Magistrate Maria Busby Earle-Caddle said the seven questions Warner had raised were legally grounded and had merit.

She was also critical of the actions of the State, and those of the US.

Warner is now challenging the constitutionality of an alleged agreement former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi signed with the US in 2015 before he signed off on the authority for the chief magistrate to go ahed with extradition proceedings for Warner.

Warner’s argument relates to the arrangement between the US and TT for extradition and the speciality principle which, by law, provides that a person who is extradited can be prosecuted or sentenced in the requesting state only in relation to the offences for which extradition was granted, and not for any other crime allegedly committed before the extradition took place.

Earle-Caddle said the actions of the then attorney general (AG) lacked consistency.

She said the agreement should be in writing to ensure the requirements of the Extradition Act were adhered to, and only then can the AG sign the certificate to move forward with the extradition.

Al-Rawi, in his authority to proceed, certified there was an arrangement with the US.

"There appears to be colossal misrepresentation on behalf of the team by AG and the requesting state (the US)."

Warner’s latest legal challenge was prompted by a freedom of information request for the alleged special arrangement. He received a response from the Office of the AG saying a search of its Central Authority's records had not uncovered a written version of the arrangements.

Earle-Caddle said Warner’s application was not frivolous or vexatious, and referred Warner’s questions to the High Court for its immediate attention.

She further questioned, "How does one certify something that is possibly nonexistent? Is this the new norm where this is a flagrant disregard for what is right? Is this the presumption of regularity that ordinary citizens must now accept? A regularity of whatever is expedient? Surely not a rubber-stamping inimical to the protections guaranteed by our legislation and Constitution.”

She emphasised that the law was clear, as the extradition process involved the liberty of citizens.

"The end result of extradition is the deprivation of a person's liberty and subjection to a foreign jurisdiction. It is of paramount importance that any process which supports taking away that freedom must adhere strictly to the legal requirements."

She said entering into an agreement was intended to protect those rights.

Earle-Caddle said the burden was on the US to ensure that the speciality agreement was in place, and its absence may result in a breach of a citizen's rights.

Warner argued that in his case there was none, and the Chief Magistrate said she was inclined to agree. She said there appeared to be uncertainty that the arrangement existed.

Earle-Caddle maintained it was the statutory duty of the Attorney General to ensure the protection of citizens' rights.

"There must be a written copy of the arrangement in existence."

She said a diplomatic note was "surreptitiously" included by the State in its response to Warner’s application to give an ex-post-facto (after the fact) assurance that the speciality requirement will be observed if Warner is sent to the US to face the charges there.

She said this February 28, 2023, note did not negate the absence of an arrangement that should have been prepared in 2015, but lent credence to the apparent non-existence of the arrangement.

"A written arrangement is required along with the authority to proceed."

She also said Warner’s latest challenge bore no similarity to his previous one, nor was it an abuse of the court’s process.

She also said the written agreement was a pre-condition to the authority to proceed, and in the absence of one, there appeared to be a “colossal misrepresentation” by the team representing the State. This, she said, must be examined and, if true, condemned.

Earle-Caddle said the adducing of false representations by an executive arm of the State that had “the proclivity to breach the fundamental rights of our citizens can be likened to abuse and needs to be interrogated by the High Court not only for the benefit of the octogenarian or politically-sensitive person but the benefit of all citizens regardless of economic and social status, colour, creed, race or sporting interest.”

She also said, “An attorney general was expected to come to the court with clean hands to ensure that the legal process was not compromised and to maintain the public trust and confidence in the legal system.

“The questions raised will be referred to the High Court forthwith,” she ruled as she adjourned the extradition proceedings before her to January 22, 2024, pending the decision of the High Court.

Warner’s application to have the chief magistrate refer his questions to the High Court was made in February, which was the first after extradition proceedings resumed after the Privy Council’s ruling on his challenge in November last year.

On November 17, 2022, the Privy Council paved the way for the continuation of the proceedings to extradite Warner to the US to face fraud-related charges. The London court held that the US’s request for Warner’s extradition was not unfair.

The proceedings in the local court were stalled when Waner, the former FIFA jefe, challenged the process by which the extradition proceedings against him were carried out and sought to quash the authority to proceed (ATP) signed by the Attorney General in September 2015. This was after the US asked for him to be extradited to face 29 charges of fraud, corruption and money laundering. The request was made on July 24, 2015.

After the 2015 general election, Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi offered to allow Warner to make representations, but only on the condition the deadline for receipt of the ATP would be extended with his consent.

Warner refused to agree to the condition. His attorneys argued he was not given sufficient time to make representations, nor was he given disclosures of any evidence the US intended to use to secure his extradition.

The ATP gave the magistrate the green light to begin committal proceedings.

Warner is represented by Fyard Hosein, SC, Sasha Bridgemohansingh, Anil Maraj and Aadam Hosein. Appearing for ASP Alleyne, who is acting on the request of the US, are James Lewis, KC, Douglas Mendes, SC, Pamela Elder, SC, Ravi Rajcoomar, SC, Netram Kowlessar and Ryan Rajcoomar.

[Deeks]

On November 17, 2022, the Privy Council paved the way for the continuation of the proceedings to extradite Warner to the US to face fraud-related charges. The London court held that the US’s request for Warner’s extradition was not unfair.

This is a real joke. When the PC make a judgement against the TT gov't, the gov't should adhere to that decision because it is the court of final appeal. So why now this judge think the PC is wrong this time. Should they not heed to the PC final decision. If, let's say Rowley had done that, it would be chaos. The legal mafia of TT.

[asylumseeker]

On November 17, 2022, the Privy Council paved the way for the continuation of the proceedings to extradite Warner to the US to face fraud-related charges. The London court held that the US’s request for Warner’s extradition was not unfair.

This is a real joke. When the PC make a judgement against the TT gov't, the gov't should adhere to that decision because it is the court of final appeal. So why now this judge think the PC is wrong this time. Should they not heed to the PC final decision. If, let's say Rowley had done that, it would be chaos. The legal mafia of TT.

The deficiency on the table is a procedural one, not a substantive one.

[Tallman]

Jack Warner's wife to face judge in US$37m Concacaf lawsuit over Centre of Excellence
By Jada Loutoo (T&T Newsday)

MAUREEN WARNER, wife of ex-Concacaf president Jack Warner, and two of the family’s companies will join her husband and others in a US$37.8 million lawsuit against them over the ownership of the Dr Joao Havelange Centre of Excellence.

Mrs Warner, Renraw Investments Ltd and CCAM and Company Ltd sought to have Concacaf’s lawsuit against them struck out on the basis that it did not apply to them, as they had no fiduciary duty to the regional football body and the claims were statute-barred, since they related to facts dating back to 1995-2011 when the lawsuit was filed in 2016.

In December 2022, Justice Robin Mohammed dismissed the application by the three. Mrs Warner and the two companies appealed, and on Wednesday, Justices of Appeal Allan Mendonca and James Aboud dismissed their complaints.

“The trial against the appellants should be allowed to proceed,” was the ruling of the Appeal Court.

Aboud, who wrote the unanimous decision, said, “The trial judge essentially decided that no determination could be made at that early stage as to the liability of the appellants without first considering all of the evidence.

“The decision by the trial judge to defer making any determination on these issues until the trial, and after he had heard the full evidence so as to understand what role the appellants played in the transaction and to understand the appropriate context and meaning of their actions, was, in my opinion, both sensible and practical as a case-management decision.

“This was a proper exercise of his function and case-management discretion. The appellants have failed to demonstrate that the exercise of the trial judge’s case management discretion was erroneous or plainly wrong.”

In its substantive claim, Concacaf contends that Warner, his wife and the companies were involved in a conspiracy to misappropriate Concacaf funds, which were allocated to construct the facility, by misrepresenting that the facility was owned by Concacaf.

The football body alleged Warner defrauded Concacaf of some US$33 million and, in doing so, breached his fiduciary duties by diverting its funds to the companies he and his wife had a controlling interest in or were the controlling minds.

Concacaf also listed an accountant and his company as parties to the claim, as it contended that he had a conflict of interest by serving as the accountant for both Concacaf and the companies.

In defence of the claim, Warner, who served as Concacaf president between 1990 and 2011, said he could not recall facts surrounding the deal, owing to Concacaf's delay in bringing the claim. He also denied that he and his wife had a controlling interest in the companies and challenged the arrangement as he denied that he misappropriated funds.

Mrs Warner contended she was never involved in the financing of the project. Aboud said there was no allegation she had any direct relationship with Concacaf, fiduciary or otherwise.

“She is being sued by Concacaf for holding shares in companies which they claim were owned or obtained as a result of a breach of trust by her husband and co-shareholder/director, Mr Warner.”

He also said Concacaf did not need to go beyond its pleadings, which alleged that Mr and Mrs Warner were the controlling minds or alter egos of the corporate companies.

“Their state of mind is unknown at this preliminary stage of the proceedings, and the trial judge cannot be said to be plainly wrong to defer his decision to pierce the corporate veil until the trial.”

He also pointed out that the “crux of Concacaf’s case” related to the construction and development of the Centre of Excellence, “an impressive property that includes a large, covered auditorium or convention venue, a playing field and stadium, and a hotel, and the acquisition of the lands upon which it was built using Concacaf funds.

“The owners of the three parcels of land on which the COE was constructed with Concacaf funds are the corporate appellants.”

The judge also outlined in detail the Concacaf allegations against the Warners and the companies and said the “self-described strangers” were not strangers to Mr Warner but were “more closely affiliated” as Concacaf’s pleadings suggest.

“According to Concacaf’s pleadings, the relationship between the appellants and Mr Warner was more interconnected, incestuous, and mutually rewarding. Mrs Warner was a shareholder/director of the corporate appellants that received the funds.

“The corporate appellants are alleged to have been ‘a cover’ for Mr Warner to surreptitiously facilitate, through companies under the control of himself and Mrs Warner, the acquisition of the lands upon which the COE was eventually constructed with Concacaf funds.

“The facts of their participation in a breach of trust have not yet been interrogated at a trial,” Aboud said as he dismissed the procedural appeals.

The matter will now return to the judge for case management.

Mrs Warner was represented by attorneys Rishi Dass, SC, and Marina Narinesingh. The companies were represented by Fyard Hosein, SC, Sasha Bridgemohansingh, Aadam Hosein and Anil Mararaj. Attorneys Jonathan Walker and Cherie Gopie represented Concacaf.

Concacaf also filed similar proceedings against Warner in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

In July 2019, Concacaf obtained a US$20 million default judgment against Warner after he failed to attend hearings of the case or send legal representation.

Judge William F c**tz entered judgment against Warner, who is facing extradition to the US in a separate criminal case.

In November 2022, Warner lost his challenge to his extradition to face a barrage of charges of racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, and bribery, and allegedly, from the early 1990s, he "began to leverage his influence and exploit his official positions for personal gain."

He also allegedly accepted a million-dollar bribe from South African officials in return for voting to award them the 2010 World Cup and allegedly bribed officials with envelopes of cash.

In June, he received the go-ahead from the Chief Magistrate to take his latest legal challenge to the High Court. Warner has complained about the constitutionality of an alleged agreement former attorney general Faris Al-Rawi signed with the US in 2015 before he signed off on the authority for the chief magistrate to go ahead with the extradition trial.

Soon after the ruling by Chief Magistrate Maria Busby Earle-Caddle, Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, said he was “disturbed” by the ruling.

In its US lawsuit, Concacaf alleged Warner victimised the body, stealing and defrauding it out of tens of millions of dollars in brazen acts of corruption. It sought US$20 million in compensatory damages and unspecified punitive damages, which included the cost of the Centre of Excellence in Macoya, which is also the focus of the separate claim before Mohammed.

The lucrative property features a swimming complex, restaurants, a hotel, conference facilities, a gym and the Marvin Lee Stadium.

Issues over ownership of the property arose after Concacaf instituted an investigation into Warner and former president Chuck Blazer. That investigation was three years before the two were implicated in the US investigations into corruption at Fifa, for which Warner has been indicted by a grand jury.

[Deeks]

 

[Tallman]

‘Nightmare is over’: Warner welcomes US Supreme Court FIFA ruling
By Rickie Ramdass (T&T Express)

FORMER FIFA vice-president Austin Jack Warner says he has no doubt that the “nightmare” brought upon him by the United States government, which accused him of bribery, money laundering and other fraud-related crimes during his time as an executive of football’s governing body, is now over.

His comment came following a ruling in the United States Supreme Court last week Friday in which the court held that prosecutors in the US overreached their boundaries when they applied laws of the United States to groups of people, many of them being foreign nationals, who allegedly defrauded FIFA, another foreign organisation, with its headquarters based in Switzerland.

“My lawyers have told me that my nightmare is over and I have every reason to believe what they have said. They are now working to pursue the matter further to see what redress I am entitled to. They have told me that my nightmare is over because the Supreme Court is not a court that you can appeal against. It is the final court in the US,” Warner said yesterday.

He was speaking during an interview on radio station i95.5FM, with sports commentator Andre Baptiste.

The radio station is a member of One Caribbean Media (OCM), which also includes the Express and CCN TV6.

The New York Times reported on January 27 that the Supreme Court last year limited a law that was key to the FIFA case. Last September, a federal judge, citing that law, threw out the convictions of two defendants linked to football corruption.

Now, several former football officials at FIFA, including some who paid millions of dollars in penalties and served time in prison, are arguing that the bribery schemes for which they were convicted are no longer considered a crime in the United States.

They are now seeking to have all their fines repaid, and also be compensated for the time they were made to spend in prison.

Overstepping boundaries

During the interview with Baptiste yesterday, Warner said he always knew that the US government was over-stepping its boundaries.

“I am in full agreement with the Supreme Court matter. I always knew that the US was wrong to attack and destroy FIFA and destroy people’s lives and so on just because they did not get a World Cup venue. It is utterly ridiculous for people to be imprisoned and to be charged being a member of a private organisation as FIFA and to be charged by the US government for what they did or did not do to stay in FIFA.

“I always knew that was an overreach, (an) overkill and I think the Supreme Court has justified what my thoughts have been in the matter,” said Warner.

Warner is currently facing extradition proceedings in this country to be sent to the United States to face the criminal charges he allegedly committed.

The proceedings are expected to come up for hearing sometime later this month in the Port of Spain Eighth Magistrates’ Court.

However, given the ruling of the US Supreme Court, the extradition warrant that was issued by the US government in 2015 may be discontinued.

“I am feeling relieved. My life has been destroyed, my family’s life has been destroyed and I have spent tonnes of money on this matter. All I did was to tell FIFA that it is time to change the paradigm of giving the World Cup to Europe and South America. I said to them, ‘just go to the Middle East’.

“It is this that has caused me to be where I am today. The irony is that people in the Middle East, thanks to my efforts and others, Qatar (which hosted the World Cup in 2022) has produced one of the best World Cups this world has ever seen. So, I feel vindicated in a sense for what I have done, but the price that I have paid for that is overbearing,” said Warner.

He added that another issue he wanted to raise was the millions of dollars of taxpayers’ funds the State had spent paying attorneys to have him extradited to the United States.

“The US government wants to have me extradited to the US, then the US should engage lawyers here and spend their own money and not taxpayers’ money of which part is mine.

“Here you have a government of Trinidad and Tobago spending taxpayers’ money to try to get a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago sent to the US.”

Warner said his attorneys had sent a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the Office of the Attorney General to determine exactly how much funds had been dispensed to attorneys up to the date of the request to have him extradited.

The State, he said, only provided some of the information.

It revealed that at least $7.5 million had been spent.

“They said they could not release the rest of information. That has forced us to take the AG to court and we have engaged the AG in the matter because we feel that a full revelation must be made to the people of this country of what the Government has spent on a trial to get its citizen extradited to another country,” said Warner.

[kounty]

haha! uncle Jack, boy! Welcome back!
Still time for you to run as Concacaf & TTFF ultimate nuanced counselor... or whatever title u see fit!

[Flex]

AG Armour: Warner has matters before the courts.
By Clint Chan Tack (T&T Newsday).

ATTORNEY General Reginald Armour, SC, said former FIFA vice-president Jack Warner still has matters before the local courts.

Armour made this comment on Saturday in response to statements made by Warner during a radio interview on February 1 about the rulings of the US Supreme Court and a lower court to throw out the convictions of two defendants linked to football corruption in September last year.

In a WhatsApp response, Armour said, "Mr Warner has active, ongoing matters before the courts of Trinidad and Tobago and I do not propose to engage in public commentary on any of his matters."

Warner still has challenges before the magistrates' court to extradition proceedings related to corruption charges against him when he was FIFA vice-president.

The matter has been adjourned to March 1 for a status update since his attorneys are expected to file the section 14 referral claim in the High Court.

Warner’s argument relates to the arrangement between the US and Trinidad and Tobago for extradition and the specialty principle which, by law, provides that a person who is extradited can be prosecuted or sentenced in the requesting state only in relation to the offences for which extradition was granted, and not for any other crime allegedly committed before the extradition took place.

According to a January 27, 2024 New York Times article, these rulings “cast doubt on the legal basis for a host of prosecutions” surrounding those involved in scandals coming out of the December 2015 raids on FIFA officials in Zurich, Switzerland.

In June 2011, Warner, who was then provisionally suspended by the world football governing body for alleged corruption, resigned from all his international football posts.

Warner was one of 14 top FIFA officials and corporate executives to be accused of corruption, fraud and money laundering while he was FIFA vice-president.

In 2015, Warner was indicted in 29 charges of corruption in the US. In the radio interview, Warner said the court’s ruling to toss the convictions of an ex-21st Century Fox executive and sports marketing company on corruption charges in a case involving FIFA has him feeling relieved.

That September case, according to the New York Times, in which “the two defendants benefited from two recent Supreme Court rulings that had rejected federal prosecutors’ application of the law at play in the soccer cases and offered rare guidance on what is known as honest services fraud.

“The defendants in the soccer trial had been found to have engaged in bribery that deprived organisations outside the US of their employees’ honest services, which constituted fraud at the time. But the judge ruled that the court’s new guidance meant that those actions were no longer prohibited under American law.”

Warner said, "My lawyers have told me that my nightmare is over, and I have every reason to believe what they are saying. And they are now working to pursue the matter further to what redress I am entitled to."

On November 17, 2022, the Privy Council paved the way for the continuation of the proceedings to extradite Warner to the US to face the charges. The London-based court held that the US request for Warner’s extradition was not unfair.

The proceedings in the local court were stalled when Warner challenged the process by which the extradition proceedings against him were carried out and sought to quash the authority to proceed (ATP) signed by the Attorney General in September 2015.

This was after the US asked for him to be extradited to face 29 charges of fraud, corruption and money laundering. The request was made on July 24, 2015.

After the September 7, 2015 general election, then attorney general Faris Al-Rawi offered to allow Warner to make representations, but only on condition, the deadline for receipt of the ATP would be extended with his consent.

Warner refused to agree to the condition. His attorneys argued he was not given sufficient time to make representations, nor was he given disclosures of any evidence the US intended to use to secure his extradition.

The ATP gave the magistrate the green light to begin committal proceedings.

The US Department of Justice claims that from as far back as 1990, Warner leveraged his influence and exploited his official positions for personal gain. He is accused of receiving US$5 million in bribes to vote for Russia to host the 2018 World Cup.

Extradition proceedings against Warner are yet to begin.