Gianni

Asked how confident he was in his ability to get the five endorsements, he said: “I have confidence. I already asked to some of the member association and [received] good replies so far.”

He laughed when asked if he realistically hopes to win the election in Morocco in March, before saying: “Of course, of course yes, I hope I will win. It is not easy.”

Tashima’s campaign will centre on his philosophy for the role of Fifa president, which he described as one based on the “values of sincerity, soundness, fair play, and integrity”.

Regarding the Balogun red-card incident, which involved US President Donald Trump calling Infantino to ask for the ban to be reviewed, Tashima said: “I have never seen the red card and the next game who can play.

“This is, I hope, never happens in the world football. He didn’t explain about this issue, how to come and how [it came] to happen.

He added: “Most of the things are not answered yet by Mr President Infantino.

“With my experience in Japan Football Association, Asian Football Confederation, and Fifa, for some more than 20 years, I would like to bring good change if I am elected.”

Last month, former Tottenham Hotspur defender Ramon Vega announced his intention to stand as a candidate in next year’s Fifa presidential election.

He told BBC Sport he had received “more than five” endorsements, but declined to give details of the identities of the member associations backing him.

All candidates must prove they have played an “active role” in football for two of the last five years. Vega has said he is confident he is eligible to stand for the presidency as a shareholder of a club.

Vega has attempted to run for the presidency three times before but each time has failed to garner the necessary support of five associations.

Tashima can therefore be considered the first serious challenger to Infantino.

Fifa says “key documents” relating to president Gianni Infantino’s failed plan to sell off stakes in the World Cup to private investors will be made available to members of its council.

Last month, Uefa gave football’s world governing body until 2 November to release details about the hugely controversial Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal, and to answer a list of questions relating to its governance and decision-making.

That followed a council meeting at which Infantino apologised for the abandoned sell-off plot but failed to offer a full explanation for how the proposal was devised, asking that questions be submitted in writing.

Just hours before the deadline from European football’s governing body passed, Fifa secretary general Mattias Grafstrom wrote to members of its main decision-making body – saying they will be able to view “key documents”, but only in person at the organisation’s headquarters in Zurich.

In his letter – seen by BBC Sport – he says the paperwork will be available “under strict review protocols to preserve confidentiality”, with council members asked to register to see them within the next two weeks.

It is unclear which documents will be made available.

BBC Sport has been told Fifa viewed Uefa’s two-week deadline to respond to more than 100 questions as unfeasible, given their recent focus on organising a new youth World Cup in Azerbaijan and preparations for an extraordinary congress later this month.

Sources have also indicated Fifa’s ability to answer some questions is limited by legal action that Uefa launched in October in the US, requesting disclosure of evidence and documents, warning it could lodge a criminal complaint in Switzerland.

Last month, Uefa told Fifa that it had failed to address “a number of fundamental questions”.

The letter included eight pages of questions covering a number of issues, from FFE and funding to national associations, to the awarding of an inaugural Fifa Peace Prize to US President Donald Trump and the controversial suspended ban given to USA striker Folarin Balogun at the World Cup.

“The withdrawal of FFE, the acknowledgement of mistakes and the announcement of ‘potential governance reforms’ do not answer how the relevant decisions were taken or why the Fifa Council was not involved at the appropriate stage,” the letter said.

“These questions require answers now. They cannot be deferred until the next meeting of the Fifa Council – nor can future governance reforms substitute for scrutiny of decisions already taken and accountability for them.”

Uefa did not outline what steps it intended to take should Fifa not meet the deadline, but hoped it added to the pressure on Infantino before 18 November – the cut-off date for any candidates to confirm they are standing against him in next year’s presidential election.

In his letter Grafstrom says that Uefa’s demand “contains significantly more questions than the Fifa administration could reasonably have anticipated” and that it is “currently working on a response which we will share with all council members in due course.”

He adds that the FFE proposal “could not have proceeded without the cumulative and mandatory approval of the council, and a majority of member associations, and in that event, there would be and has been no penalty to Fifa for withdrawing from the proposal”.

Uefa has been approached for comment.

Uefa has posed a great number of questions about FFE.

“When was the idea of FFE first explored, by whom and with what objective?” Uefa asked. “Who within Fifa authorised the development of the project, and which members of the Fifa administration were involved?

“What concrete measures will Fifa put in place to ensure that the shortcomings identified in the FFE process cannot occur again in the future?”

Uefa requested information on whether Infantino would have held or expected to hold any position, role or function in FFE, either during or following his tenure as Fifa president.

The relationship with Joshua Kushner’s Thrive Capital was covered in detail, asking why an agreement granting exclusivity to the company was signed without prior consultation of the Fifa Council.

“Why was Thrive Capital selected as lead investor, without any competitive tendering process and under conditions of strict confidentiality, despite its links to the family of the recipient of the Fifa Peace Prize?” Uefa asked.

Kushner is the brother of Donald Trump’s son-in-law, while the US president was awarded the Peace Prize.

Uefa also requested answer about the award of the Peace Prize, specifically who decided to establish it, for what purpose, and who decided that Trump should receive it.

When the FFE plan was revealed in the days following the World Cup final, Infantino told the 211 member associations (MAs) they would receive $40m (£30m) if they backed it. He then set a deadline of 19 September for federations to accept his plans if they wanted to access an initial $20m (£15m).

However, once the scheme was abandoned, Uefa and Concacaf called on Fifa to pay at least $10m (£7.5m) from its cash reserves to each of the MAs and, last week, Infantino agreed, proposing to increase the amount of money handed out for football development across the world by $3.4bn (£2.6bn).

The releasing of cash from its reserves will result in double the level of planned distribution funding for MAs from 2027 to 2030, with $25m (£19m) available per member association.

“Why was substantially increased funding for MAs presented in connection with FFE and external investment, rather than being financed directly from Fifa’s own resources?” Uefa has asked.

“Given Fifa’s strong financial position, why was it considered necessary to seek investment from private investors? What financial or strategic advantages would such an arrangement have offered compared with funding football development directly from Fifa’s own resources, particularly in light of Fifa’s subsequent proposal to do precisely that on a substantially increased scale?”

President Gianni Infantino has apologised to the Fifa Council for his World Cup sell-off plan – but has been told he is not fit to lead unless he releases all of the documents and answers key questions.

The Fifa Council met in Zurich on Thursday for the first time since Infantino’s secret Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal emerged.

Under FFE, which Infantino scrapped within days, a portion of the commercial rights of football’s world governing body would have been given to a private investment firm.

In a three-and-a-half-hour meeting, Infantino also faced questions about US striker Folarin Balogun’s suspended red-card ban, the Fifa Peace Prize and funding for national associations.

Football Association chair Debbie Hewitt – a Fifa vice-president – said afterwards that many questions remained unanswered.

“One of the disappointing things is that we didn’t get answers to anything that we had specifically requested – for example getting the papers from FFE,” Hewitt said.

“I asked the question ‘why not?’ – and we were asked to submit those questions in writing.

“I think the man has to answer those questions and if he doesn’t answer those questions now, he’s not fit to be Fifa president – and that was what was shared in the meeting.”

Hewitt acknowledged there had been “some contrition” in Infantino’s apology.

“Then there were no holds barred in terms of what we felt about what had happened,” she added.

“What he really apologised for was not bringing it to the council. If you regret it that deeply, share it with us.”

Uefa – European football’s governing body – has been one of Infantino’s fiercest critics and has repeatedly called on him to stand down.

It has prepared criminal legal proceedings against Infantino and lodged a claim in three US courts for all documents related to FFE to be released.

Asked if there was any change in stance from Uefa about Infantino, Hewitt added: “From my position, nothing has shifted. I’ve no new information that makes me feel any differently, other than we do have a president who is apologetic.”