3 Shocking Reasons Why CAF Could Still Punish Dieumerci Mukoko Over Orlando Pirates Headbutt Incident

DR Congo giants Saint Eloi Lupopo are set to face further scrutiny from the Confederation of African Football (CAF) after their tempestuous CAF Champions League second preliminary round clash against Orlando Pirates on Saturday. 

At the centre of the storm is Dieumerci Mukoko, Lupopo’s combative midfielder, whose behaviour on the pitch has drawn widespread criticism. 

The player, who was already testing the referee’s patience with time-wasting and provocation, allegedly headbutted Pirates’ Masindi Nemtajela just before half-time.

PAY ATTENTION: Stay updated with the Latest Sports News in Kenya from Pulse Sports 

In the ensuing chaos, the referee Ndala Ngambo made a crucial error — sending off the wrong player. Lupopo’s Chris Sumbu Maniania and Pirates’ Tshepang Moremi were both shown red, while Mukoko, the actual aggressor, escaped punishment.

Despite Pirates’ convincing 3-0 victory on the night, the tie ended 3-3 on aggregate, forcing a penalty shootout that saw Lupopo advance 5-4 to the group stage. 

The result, however, has been overshadowed by allegations of injustice and poor officiating, with fans and pundits calling for CAF to review the incident. Under CAF’s disciplinary framework, there are multiple avenues through which the case could still be revisited — and potentially lead to punishment for Mukoko.

The first and most compelling reason why CAF could still act lies in Article 39 of its disciplinary regulations. This provision allows for the correction of mistaken identity, meaning that if the referee penalised the wrong player, CAF can step in to rectify the error administratively. It’s a rare but crucial mechanism designed to ensure that justice is served, even after a match has concluded.

In this case, all visual evidence points to Mukoko being the perpetrator of the headbutt — not Chris Sumbu Maniania, who was wrongly dismissed. 

If Orlando Pirates or Saint Eloi Lupopo submit official proof , such as match footage or photographs,  CAF’s disciplinary board has the authority to review and amend the referee’s decision. This does not challenge the referee’s interpretation of play but rather corrects an administrative oversight.

Should CAF confirm that Mukoko was indeed guilty of violent conduct, the player could face a three-match suspension. According to CAF’s disciplinary code, an assault on an opponent — including acts such as headbutting — automatically triggers a minimum three-game ban. This could have a significant impact on Lupopo’s group-stage campaign, potentially sidelining one of their most influential players.

For a disciplinary review to occur, the affected party must file an intent to appeal within three days and a detailed petition within seven days, accompanied by a $3,000 (R51,667) deposit. 

If the appeal is successful, the fee is refunded. This process, though procedural, provides a structured way to seek justice for errors that dramatically affect the outcome of matches.

The absence of VAR technology in preliminary CAF Champions League rounds has made these cases even more contentious. Had VAR been in operation, the referee could have easily identified the true offender. Instead, CAF now faces the challenge of retroactively ensuring that the rules are upheld and that deliberate misconduct does not go unpunished.

Beyond the legalities, the emotional fallout from the incident has been enormous. Orlando Pirates fans have taken to social media with hashtags like #JusticeForMoremi and #BanMukoko, demanding CAF step in. 

Supporters argue that allowing Mukoko’s actions to go unpunished sends a dangerous message that violent and unsporting behaviour can be overlooked when referees make mistakes.

Football analyst and former Moroccan international Abdeslam Ouaddou has urged calm but acknowledged the seriousness of the situation. 

“CAF’s disciplinary process is administrative, not emotional,” he said.

“But if clear  evidence shows that Mukoko assaulted an opponent, CAF will be obligated to act.”

Ultimately, this is not just about one player or one match. It’s about the credibility of African football governance.