The economic, political, and social monopoly over the world’s most popular sport that football governance organizations, headed by FIFA, collectively possess, has conferred upon the system of international football governance a degree of legitimacy on par with that enjoyed by civil governments. The international system of football governance has used this clout, combined with and bolstered by an extensive internal dispute resolution system, to avoid liability and scrutiny before civil governments.
A doctrinal failure of civil procedure makes remedy a driving force in determining where a dispute will be adjudicated, despite not being a factor in the legal forum selection test. Remedy remains important even to the private dispute resolution infrastructure—which is also subject to political and other extra-legal considerations—that the international system of football governance favors. The international system of football governance must reevaluate its posture towards justice-seekers to preserve the balance between its extra-legal structure and the legitimacy civil governments accord to it. Improving the causes of action and remedies it offers will benefit both the international system of football governance and the international legal order.