In a letter sent shortly before UEFA’s 2 November deadline, FIFA secretary general Mattias Grafstrom said council members could inspect the material at the organisation’s headquarters in Zurich. Access will be subject to strict confidentiality arrangements, with members required to register their interest within two weeks. FIFA has not confirmed which documents will be available.

The offer follows UEFA’s submission of 42 questions concerning the FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal and broader concerns about governance under Infantino’s presidency. UEFA had demanded written answers and supporting documentation after Infantino apologised to the council for shortcomings in the consultation process.

FFE would have transferred FIFA’s commercial and operational event activities into a subsidiary, allowing external investors to acquire a minority stake. FIFA argued the structure could generate additional funding for its 211 member associations while preserving its control. The proposal was abandoned after widespread opposition, led in part by UEFA.

Grafstrom said FIFA was preparing a response, but suggested the scale of UEFA’s demands had exceeded what the administration could reasonably have anticipated.

The dispute has also escalated into the legal arena. UEFA has approached US courts seeking documents and testimony from parties connected to the proposed investment, with the intention of supporting a potential criminal complaint in Switzerland against Infantino and possibly other officials. No criminal charges have been brought.

UEFA’s scrutiny extends beyond FFE to other decisions during Infantino’s tenure, including the FIFA Peace Prize awarded to US president Donald Trump and the handling of the suspended ban imposed on striker Folarin Balogun at the World Cup.

The timing adds to the pressure. The deadline for presidential candidates to register is 18 November, ahead of the election in March 2027, in which Infantino is seeking another term.

FIFA insists the investment plan could not have proceeded without council and member-association approval. However, allowing restricted access to documents does little to settle the central question of why the proposal advanced before the council was properly consulted.