HIGHLIGHTS

The 2026 FIFA World Cup: Balancing Border Security and Human Rights

The 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup is historic in many ways. For the first time, the tournament is being jointly hosted by three countries—the United States, Canada, and Mexico. It is also the largest World Cup in history, featuring 48 teams and 104 matches.

Another important feature of this edition is FIFA’s decision to include human rights commitments in its hosting requirements. However, the tournament has also brought attention to an important legal question: how should a country balance its sovereign right to control its borders with international expectations of openness and equal treatment during a global sporting event?

FIFA’s Human Rights Commitments

In recent years, FIFA has strengthened its human rights framework for host nations. Countries bidding to host major tournaments are expected to uphold principles such as non-discrimination, accessibility, and respect for human rights.

These measures were introduced partly to ensure that sporting events promote inclusion and avoid being used to overlook human rights concerns. As a result, host countries are encouraged to create a welcoming environment for players, officials, media personnel, and fans from around the world.

The Role of State Sovereignty

At the same time, every nation has the sovereign authority to regulate entry into its territory. Under domestic laws, governments retain the power to issue visas, conduct security checks, and deny entry when national security or immigration concerns arise.

In the United States, immigration decisions are governed by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which grants border officials broad discretion over admissions into the country. Importantly, possession of a visa does not automatically guarantee entry.

This creates a complex legal situation during international sporting events: while organisations such as FIFA seek to facilitate global participation, host states maintain ultimate control over their borders.

Concerns Raised by Civil Society Groups

Human rights organisations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have expressed concerns regarding the impact of immigration enforcement on the World Cup experience. These groups argue that strict border practices could discourage participation and create uncertainty for visitors.

Some organisations have also raised issues relating to racial profiling, intrusive searches, and unequal treatment of travellers from certain countries. They have called on host authorities to ensure that security measures are implemented in a fair and non-discriminatory manner.

On the other hand, U.S. authorities have maintained that border controls are necessary to protect national security and ensure public safety during a major international event.

The Case of Referee Omar Artan

The tension between immigration enforcement and tournament participation became particularly visible in the case of Somali referee Omar Artan, who was reportedly denied entry into the United States despite holding valid travel documents.

The incident drew attention because FIFA officials and match referees are generally expected to move freely to perform their duties during international tournaments.

Legally, however, border authorities retain the power to deny entry under domestic law, even where an individual possesses a visa. The case, therefore, highlights the broader challenge of reconciling state sovereignty with the operational needs of global sporting events.

Questions of Equal Treatment

Reports of stricter screening procedures for certain national delegations have also sparked debate about equal treatment and non-discrimination. Some countries have raised concerns that visa restrictions or additional screening may disproportionately affect their citizens.

At the same time, governments have emphasised that security assessments are based on national policies and risk evaluations rather than sporting considerations.

The issue illustrates how geopolitical tensions can sometimes extend into international sporting events, creating legal and diplomatic challenges for organisers and host states alike.

Looking Ahead

The 2026 FIFA World Cup represents not only a celebration of sport but also an important test of how international events operate within domestic legal systems.

While FIFA’s human rights commitments seek to promote inclusion and accessibility, host nations continue to exercise sovereign powers over immigration and border security. Finding a balance between these competing interests remains one of the central legal challenges of hosting global mega-events.

As international sporting competitions continue to grow in scale and complexity, the relationship between human rights obligations and state sovereignty is likely to remain an important area of legal debate in the years ahead.

Reference

• CBS News: Reported on the direct confirmation of Referee Omar Artan's denial of entry by CBP and the travel restrictions facing Iranian officials.
• The Athletic Detailed the White House's legal justifications using national security laws to override FIFA credentials.
• Amnesty International USA issued a formal travel advisory warning international fans about racial profiling and invasive electronic searches.
• ACLU: Launched a "Know Your Rights" legal campaign addressing the massive scale of domestic ICE deployments within the 11 U.S. host cities.