Samuel Eto’o faces fresh scrutiny over $665,000 Russia match fee sent to personal Qatar account

The Times reported on Thursday that it had examined contracts and invoices requesting two payments of €455,056 and €112,514 to an account belonging to Eto’o at Qatar National Bank in Doha.

The payments related to Cameroon’s October 2023 friendly against Russia in Moscow. Eto’o has led the Cameroon Football Federation, commonly known as Fecafoot, since December 2021 and also sits on the Confederation of African Football’s executive committee.

The documents provide a stronger basis for examining the payment instructions, but they do not establish that Eto’o stole or personally retained the money.

Former Fecafoot executive Guibai Gatama told The Times that he knew of no accounting or banking evidence showing that the funds were later transferred to an official federation account or entered in Fecafoot’s books.

That remains an allegation. Fecafoot’s complete accounts, the sending bank’s records and Eto’o’s account statements have not been made public.

Eto’o and Fecafoot had not responded to The Times when its report was published.

The allegation predates the new documentary reporting. The dispute itself did not begin in September 2026.

Eto’o reportedly denied enriching himself and attributed the payment arrangement to technical difficulties in processing the transaction. That earlier response must be included so the new article does not present the entire allegation as a fresh discovery.

What is new is The Times’ claim that it examined both invoices and contracts, its identification of a second €112,514 payment instruction and the resulting combined figure of €567,570.

FIFA faces questions over ethics complaint

Former Fecafoot officials say formal complaints were submitted to FIFA’s ethics committee more than a year ago but that they have received no information about the outcome.

FIFA says its president, Gianni Infantino, cannot influence its independent judicial bodies. It also says its ethics committee is not required to provide complainants with regular updates and decides whether to publish outcomes case by case.

Questions about FIFA’s handling of the complaint have intensified because Eto’o has publicly described Infantino as a brother and recently supported the FIFA president during a dispute over a proposed commercial company involving private investors.

Eto’o’s political relationship with Infantino does not prove interference. No evidence made public so far establishes that Infantino obstructed or influenced an investigation.

The key question is why a national-team match fee was paid into the federation president’s personal account and where the money ended up.

Answering that requires the original contracts, proof of transfer, Fecafoot’s audited accounts and a full response from Eto’o.