Sport is often presented by Sports Governing Bodies
(SGBs), and in particular the International Olympic Committee, as
apolitical. A neutral endeavor, which ignores the whims of politics and
keeps national governments at arm’s length. In short, it is thought of as an
autonomous sphere of transnational society wishing to remain
unaffected by the political turbulences out there. In fact, many SGBs enforce strict rules banning political speech by individuals, and in the spaces, subjected to their contractual power. Moreover, FIFA, for example, regularly issues effective sanctions against states
which are perceived as threatening the autonomy of the governance of
football on their territory. Hence, this apolitical ideal of
international sports is not only a founding myth of the Olympic
Movement, it is actively pursued by SGBs through their private
regulatory powers and has hard consequences for athletes, clubs, sport
officials alike.
Yet, on 24 February, Russia decided to invade Ukraine, in what has
become the most important land war in Europe since the implosion of
ex-Yugoslavia. This invasion was quickly followed by condemnations from
the IOC and many other SGBs, leading in many cases, most prominently by
UEFA and FIFA, to the exclusion of Russian teams and athletes from
international sporting competitions. This reaction is difficult to
square with the neutrality and autonomy of sport so vigorously defended
by the international SGBs until recently. It raises also many questions
of double standards: why did this illegal invasion lead to sporting
consequences and not others? Furthermore, the Court of Arbitration of
Sport recently released two orders (available here and here)
concerning UEFA and FIFA’s decisions to exclude Russian national teams
and clubs from their football competitions, which outline the legal
strategies pursued by the SGBs to reconcile the public urge to exclude
Russia(ns) from international sporting competitions, and their
commitments to political neutrality.
We are very happy to welcome three outstanding scholars to discuss
these issues with us from different methodological perspectives.
Speakers:
- Prof. Carmen Pérez (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid), who wrote a blog on the reactions of SGBs to Russia’s invasion
- Dr. Daniela Heerdt (Asser Institute and Centre for Sports and Human Rights), who is the co-author of a blog mapping the reactions of SGBs to Russia’s invasion
- Carole Gomez
(University of Lausanne and Institut de Relations Internationales et
Strategiques), who has been interviewed numerous times by international media on the
issue (see here and here)
Moderators:
Register for free HERE!
Editor's note:
Daniela is a researcher at the Asser Institute in the field of sport and human rights. She has a
background in public international law and human rights law and defended
her PhD project entitled “Blurred Lines of Responsibility and
Accountability – Human Rights Abuses at Mega-Sporting Events” in April
2021 at Tilburg University. She also works as independent consultant in the field of sport and human rights for the Centre for Sport and Human Rights, or the European Parliament among other clients from the sports ecosystem
As Head of Policy and Outreach, Guido is in charge of the Centre for Sport & Human Rights engagement with governments, international and intergovernmental organisations and sports organisations. He represents the Centre at conferences, events and bilateral dialogues to reach new audiences and partners and raise public awareness and understanding of the Centre’s work .
On February 24,
2022, the Russian military invaded Ukrainian territory. What followed was an
escalation of the war, day by day, causing thousands of victims and forcing
millions of people to flee. On March 2, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution deploring "in the strongest possible terms" Russia's
aggression against Ukraine by a vote of 141 to 5, with 35 abstentions. On March
29, Russian and Ukrainian representatives met in Istanbul for another round of
negotiations. No ceasefire has been agreed and hostilities continue.
Many states,
international organizations and corporations quickly took measures in response
to this invasion. Hundreds of companies decided to withdraw
from Russia. Some countries decided to strengthen economic
sanctions against Russia and Belarus and to provide military and economic help
to Ukraine. Many civil society actors mobilised to organize and provide humanitarian
support for Ukraine. Interestingly, international sports organisations like the
International Olympic Committee (IOC), the Fédération Internationale de Football
Association (FIFA), World Athletics and many other international federations, issued
statements condemning the invasion and imposed bans and sanctions on Russian
and Belarussian sports bodies and athletes.
This blog post provides
an overview of the measures adopted by a number of international sports
federations (IFs) that are part of the Olympic Movement since
the beginning of the war and analyses how they relate to the statements issued
by the IOC and other sanctions and measures taken by international sports organisations
in reaction to (geo)political tensions and conflict.
More...