The correspondence was signed by UEFA General Secretary Theodore Theodoridis and sent to FIFA General Secretary Mattias Grafström, according to The Guardian Sport. It follows a FIFA Council meeting at which Infantino faced questions about the World Cup plan and other matters but, according to the supplied reports, did not provide the requested documents.
The request concerns a plan associated with FIFA Forward Enterprise that was presented in the reports as an attempt to sell, invest in or commercialize World Cup-related rights. The plan was subsequently abandoned or failed, and the sources agree that UEFA is seeking information about how it was developed and handled.
The scale and structure of that proposal are described differently by the publishers. The Hindu and ABC Australia Sport described it as a $4.2 billion World Cup sell-off plan, while The Guardian Sport reported that FIFA had considered selling 20% of its commercial rights. The supplied evidence does not establish whether those descriptions refer to precisely the same arrangement.
The accompanying questions also differ in number across the reports. The Hindu and ABC Australia Sport said UEFA submitted or posed 42 questions, while The Guardian Sport reported that the document contained more than 50. The full document is not included in the available material, so the discrepancy cannot be resolved here.
The subjects identified by The Hindu and ABC Australia Sport include Infantino’s remuneration, payments to singer Marc Anthony, the handling of United States striker Folarin Balogun’s disciplinary case, business and political relationships involving Donald Trump and his family, and the operational independence of FIFA’s judicial, electoral and ethics committees.
The Guardian Sport reported that UEFA’s document also addressed potential conflicts of interest, calls for a genuinely independent governance review, the FIFA peace prize, relations with Donald Trump and arrangements for the next FIFA presidential election. Those matters broaden the request beyond the abandoned commercial-rights proposal to questions about FIFA’s decision-making and institutional oversight.
UEFA’s request followed what the supplied reports described as dissatisfaction among European delegates with the clarity of Infantino’s explanations. The Hindu and ABC Australia Sport reported that a formal letter said an apology and subsequent explanation had not answered fundamental questions, while The Guardian Sport reported that UEFA said requested information and documentation had not been provided.
The deadline is intended to give federations time to assess FIFA’s answers before the next stage of the presidential contest. November 2 falls before the March 18 nomination deadline for the election and before the next FIFA Council meeting, scheduled for December 16 in Doha, meaning UEFA is seeking answers before those institutional milestones rather than waiting for the council meeting.
The available reports do not establish how FIFA will respond, whether all requested documents will be released or whether the questions will produce changes to FIFA’s governance arrangements. They do establish a formal escalation: UEFA has put its concerns in writing, tied them to a specific disclosure deadline and linked the request to scrutiny of both past decisions and the coming presidential election.