# data[].attributes.body
Welcome! Here you can share messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic and Paralympic Games and beyond.

This Padlet serves as a space to value and communicate the right to freedom of expression and to share with athletes, volunteers, media, administrators, advocates, and the world. We want to also highlight the importance of freedom of expression for the future and welcome all to share recommendations and ideas.

Please feel free to share your message of support in writing, video, images, articles, however you would like to communicate the importance of the right to freedom of expression for all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why would a human rights organization go to court to support someone whose extreme political views or ethical position it fundamentally opposes? A pornographer perhaps, or an anarchist? Because of the rights asserted in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), we all have the right to form our own opinions and to express and share them freely.

"The first human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization."
-Sigmund Freud

"If we do not believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we do not believe in it at all," says linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky. Adds Human Rights Watch: "freedom of speech is a bellwether: how any society tolerates those with minority, disfavored or even obnoxious views will often speak to its performance on human rights more generally."

This right underpins many others, such as religion, assembly and the ability to participate in public affairs, but freedom of expression is not unlimited. A common metaphor to describe its limits is that you cannot falsely yell "fire" in a crowded theatre and cause a panic and possible injury. Other forms of speech generally not protected include child pornography, perjury, blackmail, and incitement to violence.

The UDHR's drafters wrestled with the issue of how tolerant a tolerant society should be of people like Nazis and fascists who themselves are intolerant. They were acutely conscious of the role played by the Nazi media and film industry in the creation of an environment that enabled the slaughter of 6 million Jews, and other groups such as the Roma and people with disabilities. After gaining power in 1933, the Nazis used a series of new laws and regulations to crush the independent media, substituting a rabid totalitarian propaganda machine in its place, under the guidance of Joseph Goebbels, the "Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda."

As a result, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence was explicitly prohibited when the UDHR was translated into binding international law via subsequent treaties. In the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, freedom of expression occupies the same slot (Article 19) as it does in the UDHR, providing explicit criteria that Governments need to comply with when restricting freedom of expression. Article 20, following immediately afterwards, sets the limits with the prohibition of incitement.

The potentially lethal results of hate speech - including its ability to enable the violation of the right to life on a massive scale -- was graphically displayed once again when Rwanda's Radio Mille Collines laid the groundwork for the 1994 genocide by dehumanizing fellow citizens and branding them enemies. Some 800,000 people were killed. More recently in Myanmar, messages of incitement to hatred and violence spread with alarming speed on Facebook, and may have contributed to genocide and crimes against humanity. The Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar pointed to the use of Facebook by the Myanmar military to incite hatred and spread false information to justify their actions against civilians. In reaction, Facebook closed several of those accounts.

You are entitled to hold any opinion, no matter how foul it may be, but the expression of that opinion - if it amounts to incitement -- must be outlawed, with clear historical examples of what can happen when it is not.

When a British tabloid newspaper revived Mille-Collines-style language in 2015, by referring to migrants and refugees as "cockroaches," the UN Human Rights Chief Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein urged European countries to take a firmer line on racism and xenophobia which, he said, "under the guise of freedom of expression, are being allowed to feed a vicious cycle of vilification, intolerance and politicization of migrants, as well as of marginalized European minorities such as the Roma."

Freedom of expression is however explicitly protected in most spheres, and there are rising concerns today at the continuing, and possibly increasing, efforts to misuse the concept of "hate speech" or "incitement" as an excuse for stifling dissent or criticism of a government in power, often using anti-terrorism legislation as the legal means to what is, under international law, an illegal end.

The UN has on numerous occasions criticized flawed domestic laws that suppress opposition or dissent in the name of combatting "hate speech," with David Kaye, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression noting that "States often assert vague prohibitions on 'advocacy of hatred' that do not amount to incitement."

Article 19 includes the right to "seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." Although individuals enjoy the same rights online as offline, states are also censoring, and sometimes criminalizing, a wide range of online content via vague or ambiguous laws prohibiting "extremism," "blasphemy", "defamation", "offensive" language, "false news" and "propaganda".

If journalists are attacked, spied on, jailed or even murdered when their quests for information are interpreted by governments or criminal enterprises as a threat, people may be unable to form an opinion or take informed decisions.

The Committee to Protect Journalists says that in 2017, 262 journalists around the world were thrown in prison, and Reporters Without Borders says 90 percent of crimes against journalists go unpunished. Even in democracies that pride themselves on being free, demonization of journalists and allegations of "fake news", and limitations on the protection of journalistic sources, are undermining their work.

As efforts to control speech and information increase, the UN Human Rights Office has provided guidance on how to distinguish free speech from hate speech through the Rabat Plan of Action, which suggests setting a high threshold for interpreting the restrictions set by international human rights law in restricting freedom of expression. Its six-part threshold test takes into account the context, intent, content, extent, speaker's status, and likelihood that the speech in question would incite action against the target group, and is being used in Tunisia, Côte d'Ivoire and Morocco, and by the European Court of Human Rights in a recent judgment on the Pussy Riot case.

To read the Rabat Plan of Action, visit: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/SeminarRabat/Rabat_draft_outcome.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OHCHR | Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70: 30 Articles on 30 Articles - Article 19

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why would a human rights organization go to court to support someone whose extreme political views or ethical position it fundamentally opposes? A pornographer perhaps, or an anarchist? Because of the rights asserted in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), we all have the right to form our own opinions and to express and share them freely.

# data[].attributes.headline
Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you are interested in receiving news and updates on the International Olympic Committee's work and activities related to public affairs, please subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you are interested in receiving news and updates on the International Olympic Committee's work and activities related to public affairs, please subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The genesis of Baron Pierre de Coubertin's idea that sport was a basic right that every human being should enjoy was more than likely first planted by Jules Simon, the former French Prime Minister, in a speech to the annual assembly of the Le Play Unions for Social Peace in Paris in 1887.

The young Baron had already travelled to England several times to study the educational model of their colleges and universities and had begun to formulate his proposals for integrating sport and games into French education. But when he heard Simon articulate the idea that sport could be a human right, his ideas crystallised. "The right which I demand for our children," Simon said, "is the right to play." In Simon's eloquent recognition of the physical educational needs of French children, Coubertin heard his own emergent ideas expressed with clarity and conviction.

That conviction-that sport belonged to all and should be played by all-grew stronger as Coubertin's evolving ethos of athletics shaped his vision for the revival of the modern Olympic Games, but not everyone agreed with his liberal concept. In fact, many considered sport the province of the wealthy. As he launched the Olympic Games at the end of the 19th century, Coubertin had to battle against that prevailing idea. As he wrote later in his memoirs: "Sport is not a luxury pastime, an activity for the leisured few, nor merely a form of muscular compensation for brain work." The struggle persisted across his career in the ever-changing definitions of amateurism, which were meant as code to exclude various groups from competition.

More than 40 years after he first heard Simon articulate the idea, the Baron closed his Olympic Memoir with an eloquent argument of his own, putting a stamp on his uncompromising position that sport belonged to everyone: "For every man, woman and child, sport offers an opportunity for self-improvement quite independent of profession or position in life. It [sport] is the birthright of all, equally and to the same degree, and nothing can replace it..."

At the end of World War I, the Baron made sure his colleagues understood his convictions-that the right to sport needed to be extended to all people. "We are all aware of the increasing excellence of the first five Olympiads of the modern era," he wrote in a circular letter to his IOC colleagues. "Our attention must be focused on the future." For the Baron, that meant pushing sport towards all those who had not yet enjoyed its benefits, particularly the children of the working class and the poor. He argued that the Olympic Movement's mission had to be extended now, in the aftermath of war, to all members of society. "Our Committee has fought more than anyone to make it [sport] a habitual pleasure of the youth of the lower middle class. Now it must be made fully accessible to proletarian adolescents. All sports for all people, that is the new goal to which we must devote our energies, a goal that is not in the least impracticable."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The genesis of Baron Pierre de Coubertin's idea that sport was a basic right that every human being should enjoy was more than likely first planted by Jules Simon, the former French Prime Minister, in a speech to the annual assembly of the Le Play Unions for Social Peace in Paris in 1887.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Olympic officials and the Chinese government have warned athletes at the Winter Olympics against staging any protests at competition venues or on the medal stand, saying they could violate Olympic rules as well as Chinese law. But if history is a guide, that message is likely to go unheeded.

The International Olympic Committee has long prohibited "demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda" at Olympic sites, although the rule was tweaked before last year's Tokyo Summer Games to allow for protests made "without disruption and with respect for competitors."

But in the days leading up to the ongoing Winter Games in Beijing, China added an ominous new wrinkle. Yang Shu, deputy director general of Beijing 2022's International Relations Department, said any protesters that violate "the Olympic spirit" or Chinese law could be subject to unspecified punishment by the host country.

The warning -- which human rights groups have advised Olympians to take seriously -- comes during an era of rising demands for social justice that are echoed by activist athletes across the globe. China faces particular scrutiny for its human rights practices, including the detention of more than 1 million Uyghur and other Muslim minorities in its western Xinjiang province as part of what the U.S. government and others have labeled a genocide.

Some U.S. officials worry that American athletes could face harsh sanctions if any protest upsets Chinese sensibilities. "Being an American citizen is in itself not protection from adverse treatment by the Chinese government," read a Jan. 28 letter to the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee from a congressional commission that monitors human rights abuses in China. "As the Commission has documented, Chinese authorities have imposed exit bans on U.S. citizens, and even jailed foreign nationals, for political or specious reasons."

Concern about the limits of free speech in China burst into the international spotlight late last year when Chinese tennis star -- and three-time Olympian -- Peng Shuai took to social media to accuse China's former vice premier Zhang Gaoli of sexual assault. Almost immediately, Peng's post was scrubbed from the internet, and she disappeared from public view, prompting concern for her safety. She resurfaced weeks later in videos where she withdrew her allegations and said she was safe -- a turnaround that some critics worry was coerced by the Chinese government.

Despite the warnings, protests tied to this year's Olympics have already begun, although it remains to be seen whether athletes will join in from Beijing. In December, the U.S. announced a diplomatic boycott of the event, meaning no top government officials are attending.

In October, as officials presided over the lighting of the Olympic torch that was ferried from Olympia, Greece, to Beijing's National Stadium, protesters with a Tibetan flag and a banner saying "no genocide games" found their way into the event.

In the weeks and months leading up to the Games, U.S. snowboarder Shaun White, a three-time gold medalist, posed on social media with a flag from Tibet, a region of China that activists say has long endured government oppression. Also, U.S. figure skaters Timothy LeDuc and Evan Bates have pointedly criticized China's human rights record in comments to reporters.

Researchers who study athlete activism say it is unclear what will happen if athletes speak up against China or stage protests that offend authorities in Beijing.

"I definitely think that athletes are going to be even more cautious headed into the Games when it comes to protest and using their voice, given the messaging from the IOC and China," said Yannick Kluch, director of outreach and inclusive excellence at Virginia Commonwealth University's Center for Sports Leadership. "But I also think if there are athletes who are outspoken, they are not going to be deterred."

Any action taken by China to punish protesting foreign athletes would quickly escalate beyond sports and become a diplomatic incident, he added. "I don't know if that pressure would be enough to protect these athletes," Kluch said. "I do think protest is very real possibility, but I also think the outcry globally would be very intense" if the Chinese were to exact any punishment.

Whatever protests do occur in Beijing would be in keeping with a long Olympic tradition. Irish track and field star Peter O'Connor staged perhaps the first act of political protest in Olympic history at the 1906 Games in Athens. He had entered the Games to represent Ireland, but newly enacted Olympic rules forced him to compete for Great Britain. To protest, he climbed a flagpole in the Olympic stadium and waved a green flag emblazoned with the words "Erin Go Bragh," or "Ireland Forever." Days later, O'Connor went on to win three gold medals.

Probably the best-known Olympic protest took place in 1968, when American sprinters John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised their gloved fists in what they called a human rights salute from the medal stand in Mexico City.

Other athlete protests have followed. Among them: At the 2004 Games in Athens, Iranian judo world champion Arash Miresmaeili refused to fight Israeli athlete Ehud Vaks, to protest Israeli treatment of Palestinians. In Rio de Janeiro in 2016, as Ethiopia's Feyisa Lilesa crossed the finish line to win silver in the marathon, he crossed his arms in an X gesture made in support of the Oromo people. And just after the IOC revised its rules governing protests last year, numerous athletes in Tokyo protested, including all the players from the Japan and Great Britain women's soccer teams, who took a knee on the pitch to support Black Lives Matter.

The IOC has never stripped medals from protesting athletes, Olympic historians say, but it has sent some home and banned others from future competition for demonstrations the committee determined crossed the line.

The stakes are raised in Beijing, where the government has a record of imprisoning dissidents for political protests and even social media critiques. Most observers think it unlikely that foreign athletes would face similar sanction, but the Chinese have not publicly ruled that out.

"What the Chinese are saying is 'well, you have to respect the laws and rules of the host country,'" said David Wallechinsky, an Olympic historian. "But the thing is you're not going to know until you get to the airport to leave the country if you're being detained."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China has warned athletes not to protest in Beijing. What happens if they do?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Olympic officials and the Chinese government have warned athletes at the Winter Olympics against staging any protests at competition venues or on the medal stand, saying they could violate Olympic rules as well as Chinese law. But if history is a guide, that message is likely to go unheeded.

# data[].attributes.headline
Although a small step in the overall sport and human rights movement, the appointment of a Human Rights Council Special Procedures expert or working group on Sport and Human Rights will be a significant landmark intersection for the global sport and human rights communities. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Although a small step in the overall sport and human rights movement, the appointment of a Human Rights Council Special Procedures expert or working group on Sport and Human Rights will be a significant landmark intersection for the global sport and human rights communities. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.sportanddev.org/en/article/news/call-un-human-rights-council-special-procedures-experts-sport-and-human-rights

# data[].attributes.headline
Beyond the Game: Human Rights and the Olympics

# data[].attributes.subject
Beyond the Game: Human Rights and the Olympics

# data[].attributes.body
Here is a link to my recent episode of Beyond the Game on Nuts and Bolts Sports featuring former Olympic Cross Country skier Noah Hoffman and Rob Koehler, Director General of Global Athlete https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbQ9YgGakuc

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Human Rights & the Beijing Olympics | Beyond the Game with Zachary Draves

# data[].attributes.headline
"Allowing athletes the freedom to express their views on such issues does not necessarily mean that the Olympic Movement becomes “political”. Rather, a relaxation of the IOC’s stance would show a true commitment to anti-discrimination and human rights."

# data[].attributes.subject
"Allowing athletes the freedom to express their views on such issues does not necessarily mean that the Olympic Movement becomes “political”. Rather, a relaxation of the IOC’s stance would show a true commitment to anti-discrimination and human rights."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Costa Rican gymnast Luciana Alvarado had found a way to protest at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games without being punished. At the end of the 18-year old's floor routine, Alvarado kneeled on the mat and raised a fist to the

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Washington DC, February 2, 2022) - A coalition of athletes and human rights groups is calling on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and The Olympic Partner (TOP) Olympic sponsors to ensure athletes' free expression is guaranteed during the Beijing Winter Games. The 2022 Beijing Games officially launch on February 4 against a backdrop of Chinese government atrocity crimes targeting Uyghur Muslims and other Turkic communities, and harsh repression in Tibet, Hong Kong, and on the mainland.

"Sponsors of the Beijing 2022 Winter Games cannot pretend that these Olympics are business as usual," said Rob Koehler, director of Global Athlete, an athletes' rights advocacy group. "Corporate sponsors say that their sponsorship is to support the athletes. Meanwhile athletes are heading into a hazardous working environment in China, with few protections for free speech and no rights to protest crimes against humanity as they may want to do. Sponsors have the responsibility to insist on games hosts that uphold-not trample-human rights."

Recent remarks by a high-ranking Beijing Organizing Committee member are a thinly veiled threat targeting athletes who could speak out about such abuses: "Any behavior or speech that is against the Olympic spirit, especially against the Chinese laws and regulations, are also subject to certain punishment."

"It's very troubling that the IOC has been so willing to get in line with the Chinese government's own approach to silencing critics," said Uyghur Human Rights Project Executive Director, Omer Kanat.

The IOC has committed to allow athlete expression during the Olympic Games, including during press conferences and through social and traditional media, but IOC Guidelines state that protest or demonstration must "comply with local legislation." The IOC has an obligation to uphold speech rights of Olympic athletes and ensure that none are subject to reprisals for exercising those rights.

"Athletes should not have to be scared for their safety when they go to China," said Noah Hoffman, two-time Olympian skier and board member of Global Athlete. "It is completely unacceptable that athletes have to censor themselves on human rights and other topics-in order to keep from being censored or sent home by the Chinese government, the Olympic host."

"Olympics stakeholders must uphold human rights during the Games, which includes athletes' freedom of speech," said Zumretay Arkin, Program & Advocacy Manager at the World Uyghur Congress. "Athletes who want to show solidarity with Uyghurs, Tibetans and Hong Kongers should be applauded, not punished."

"Athletes are already at risk of being used as propaganda during China's Olympics, and now they risk losing their freedom of speech and protest as well," said Pema Doma, Campaigns Director for Students for a Free Tibet.

"The IOC's integrity and indeed its legitimacy as an international organization will be tested by its reaction to such threats," said Bennett Freeman, member of the Steering Committee of the Coalition to End Uyghur Forced Labor and former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.

Gold medal Olympic skier Mikaela Shiffrin has said she should not have to choose between her "morals" and her "job" to compete in China. Basketball player Enes Kanter spoke out about repression of religious and other freedoms in Tibet. Two-time Olympic cross-country skier and former Team USA athlete Noah Hoffman said of his former teammates, "I am scared for their safety when they go to China."

"The Olympic Partner" sponsors including Coca-Cola, Samsung, and Airbnb regularly profess their support for them. However, to demonstrate meaningful support, sponsors must be prepared to push back on the Beijing organizers' threats, and back athletes if they are subject to reprisals or intimidation. The failure to support athletes in such circumstances makes the sponsors-along with the IOC-complicit with the Beijing Organizing Committee and the Chinese government in human rights abuses.

Finally, NBC Universal-the exclusive broadcaster of the Beijing Games in the United States-must ensure that any athlete protests related to the human rights situation in China are free from censorship. NBC's journalistic integrity will be judged by audiences and advertisers watching to ensure that it fully covers the repressive human rights climate in China, and does not participate in promoting propaganda from the Chinese government.

"Freedom of expression is an important human right under international law, but Chinese human rights defenders are routinely put in prison for merely expressing their views. The IOC and governments must be ready to protect athletes who could become victims of the Chinese government's retaliation," said William Nee, Research and Advocacy Coordinator at Chinese Human Rights Defenders.

Signed:

1. Alberta Uyghur Association

2. Amigos del Tíbet - Colombia

3. AREF international Onlus

4. Army of Survivors

5. Asociación Cultural Tibetano-Costarricense

6. Association France Tibet

7. Athlete Ally

8. Australia Tibet Council

9. Australian East Turkestan Association

10. Australian Uyghur Association

11. Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women's Association

12. Austria Uyghur Association

13. Baltic Tibet group

14. Bath District Tibet Support Group

15. Bay Area Friends of Tibet

16. Belgium Uyghur Association

17. Blue Crescent Humanitarian Aid Association

18. Campaign for Uyghurs

19. ChinaAid

20. Chinese Human Rights Defenders

21. Citizen Power Initiatives for China - 公民力量

22. Dutch Uyghur Human Rights Foundation

23. East Turkistan Association in Finland

24. East Turkistan Association of Canada

25. East Turkistan Education and Solidarity Association

26. East Turkistan Entrepreneur Tradesmen and Industrialists Businessmen Association

27. East Turkistan Human Rights Watch

28. East Turkistan New Generation Movement

29. East Turkistan Nuzugum Culture and Family Association

30. East Turkestan Press and Media Association

31. East Turkistan Sports and Development Association

32. East Turkistan Union in Europe

33. East Turkestan Union of Muslim Scholars

34. Eastern Turkistan Foundation

35. Étudiant pour Tibet Libre

36. Equality League

37. European East Turkistan Education Association

38. Finnish Uyghur Culture Center

39. Free Indo-Pacific Alliance

40. Free Tibet

41. Free Tibet Fukuoka

42. Freedom House

43. Friends of Tibet Bulgaria

44. Fundación Casa del Tibet

45. Global Alliance for Tibet & Persecuted Minorities

46. Global Athlete

47. Grupo de Apoio ao Tibete-Portugal

48. Hong Kong Democracy Council

49. Hong Kong Committee in Norway

50. Human Rights in China (HRIC)

51. Ilham Tohti Initiative

52. Indonesia Save Uyghur

53. International Campaign for Tibet

54. International Pen Uyghur Center

55. International Society for Human Rights

56. International Support for Uyghurs

57. International Tibet Network

58. International Union of East Turkistan Organizations

59. International Uyghur Human Right and Democracy Foundation

60. Isa Yusup Alptekin Foundation

61. Islamic Community Milli Gorus

62. ISHR - Sweden

63. Japan Uyghur Association

64. Jewish Movement for Uyghur Freedom

65. Latvia for Tibet

66. Norwegian Uyghur Committee

67. NY4HK

68. Omer Uygur Foundation

69. Pema Choden

70. PEN America

71. Power of Sport Lab / Athletes for Human Rights

72. Santa Barbara Friends of Tibet

73. Satuq Bugrakhan Foundation of Science and Civilization

74. Society for Threatened Peoples

75. Society Union of Uyghur National Association

76. South Mongolia Congress

77. Stop Uyghur Genocide Canada

78. Stand With Hong Kong Vienna

79. Students for a Free Tibet

80. Students for a Free Tibet -Denmark

81. Sweden Uyghur Education Union

82. Swedish Tibet Committee

83. Swiss Tibetan Friendship Association

84. Switzerland East Turkestan Association

85. Taiwan East Turkestan Association

86. The Campaign for Hong Kong

87. The Norwegian Tibet Committee

88. The Tibet Support Committee, Denmark

89. Tibet Action Institute

90. Tibet Initiative Deutschland

91. Tibet Justice Center

92. Tibet Mx

93. Tibet Rescue Initiative in Africa

94. Tibet Solidarity

95. Tibet Support Groep Nederland

96. Tibetan Community Switzerland and Liechtenstein

97. Tibetan Community of Australia

98. Tibetan Community in Britain

99. Tibetan Youth Association in Europe

100. Den norske Tibet-komité

101. US Tibet Committee

102. Uigur Society of the Kyrgyz Republic

103. Umer Uyghur Trust

104. USTC

105. Uyghur American Association

106. Uyghur Academy Australia

107. Uyghur Academy Canada

108. Uyghur Academy Europe

109. Uyghur Academy Foundation

110. Uyghur Academy Japan

111. Uyghur Academy USA

112. Uyghur Association of Victoria

113. Uyghur Center for Human Rights and Democracy

114. Uyghur Cultural and Education Union in Germany

115. Uyghur Education Union

116. Uyghur Human Rights Project

117. Uyghur Projects Foundation

118. Uyghur Refugee Relief Fund

119. Uyghur Research Institute

120. Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project

121. Uyghur Science and Civilization Research Foundation

122. Uyghur Support Group Netherlands

123. Uyghur Transitional Justice Database

124. Uyghur U.K. Association

125. Uyghur Youth Union in Kazakhstan

126. Uzbekistan Uyghur Culture Center

127. Vancouver Society in Support of Democratic Movement

128. Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation

129. Victoria Uyghur Association

130. Voces de Tíbet

131. We The Hongkongers

132. World Uyghur Congress

133. World Uyghur Congress Foundation

Media Contacts:

Rob Koehler, Global Athlete, Rob.Koehler@globalathlete.org

Omer Kanat, Uyghur Human Rights Project, kanato@uhrp.org

Zumretay Arkin, World Uyghur Congress, zumretay@uyghurcongress.org

Pema Doma, Students for a Free Tibet, pemadoma@studentsforafreetibet.org

Bennett Freeman, bennett.freeman14@gmail.com

William Nee, Chinese Human Rights Defenders, william@nchrd.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Threats to Athletes, Human Rights Crimes Define Beijing Games - Uyghur Human Rights Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Washington DC, February 2, 2022) - A coalition of athletes and human rights groups is calling on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and The Olympic Partner (TOP) Olympic sponsors to ensure athletes' free expression is guaranteed during the Beijing Winter Games.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion: Can journalists covering Beijing Olympics get the real story? | JNI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Former Olympian and human rights advocate Nikki Dryden explains the challenges journalists face covering the Winter Games in Beijing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
12 January 2022: With less than one month to the 2022 Beijing Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) continues to press forward with hosting the Games, placing the safety and wellbeing of every athlete at risk.

Over the past two years, Covid-19 has taken lives, disrupted sport, sidelined athletes, and made the playing field unequal. This unpredictability has strained athletes, and the new Omicron variant has made the situation worse. Athletes who continue to compete and travel are at a higher risk of infection than ever before.

In addition to the stress of Covid-19, the IOC awarded the Games to China, a country recognized internationally for its human rights violations. This unfairly makes athletes pawns in a geopolitical fight. The IOC is to blame for putting athletes in this position; no athlete can be faulted for their choice to attend or not attend the Games.

Making matters worse, the IOC continues to suppress athlete speech, limiting their ability to speak out about human rights issues in China and elsewhere. Athletes are being used to strengthen and legitimize the Chinese Government, and simultaneously their voices are being silenced.

As athletes prepare to face unprecedented and unpredictable conditions in China, we condemn the IOC for failing to protect every athlete attending these Games, for failing to ensure equal access and fair competition, for forcing athletes into a political fight over human rights, and for suppressing athletes' freedom of expression.
Health and Safety:
With countries around the world struggling to contain the highly transmissible Omicron variant, the IOC fails to make athletes' safety a priority. The IOC is:

- refusing to provide athletes single room accommodations, increasing the risk of infection,

- forcing athletes to sign Covid-19 liability waivers to assume all risk for their participation at the Games; these waivers wrongfully absolve the IOC and Beijing 2022 of all responsibility for keeping athletes safe,

- not providing details of quarantine facilities,

- not providing details on the type of mental health and wellbeing support offered.
Fairness:
The integrity of competition and a fair qualification process have been undermined by the IOC's continue-at-all-costs attitude and lack of flexibility.

- The IOC, and by extension the International Federations, have shown limited flexibility in qualification standards for those athletes who missed qualifying events due to event cancellation, travel restrictions, and/or illness.

- The IOC's rigid competition schedule at the Games will undermine the integrity of the competition, and many events will not feature the best athletes. By insisting on a rigid competition schedule, the IOC has placed the interests of broadcast rights holders over the interests of athlete safety and fair competition.
Covid-19 Testing:
Athletes' competition fate is placed in the hands those administrating Covid-19 testing.

- The IOC has not put in place independent doping control style protocols to ensure that Covid-19 testing is secure and free from manipulation. Athletes have little reason to trust the integrity of the process.
Human Rights / Freedom of Expression:
Freedom of expression does not exist in China.

- China has a proven record of silencing those who speak out against the State. IOC Rule 50.2 continues to punish athletes who use the podium or the playing field to peacefully protest. This IOC rule combined with the opaque Chinese system places every athlete at risk.

- With no guaranteed protection by the IOC or the Chinese authorities, we strongly advise athletes not to speak up about human rights issues while in China. The disappearance of Peng Shuai is a glaring example of the type of the risk athletes face when they speak up.

The grim state of these Olympics and the lack of athletes' rights present an urgent call for reform of the IOC and for accountability for sport administrators. Reform must empower athletes to independently organize and to engage in collective bargaining. The outdated dictatorial approach of the IOC can no longer be tolerated. Athletes can no longer have their rights suppressed nor can they be expected to fuel the multi-billon dollar Olympic industry without compensation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The International Olympic Committee is Failing Athletes' Rights - Global Athlete

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
12 January 2022: With less than one month to the 2022 Beijing Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) continues to press forward with hosting the Games, placing the safety and wellbeing of every athlete at risk. Over the past two years, Covid-19 has taken lives, disrupted sport, sidelined athletes, and made the playing field unequal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Despite criticism, the IOC appears unwilling to changed controversial Rule 50

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NPR's A Martinez talks to Yannick Kluch, an expert on diversity and inclusion in sports, about Rule 50 of the Olympic charter that prohibits demonstration during the Games.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tommie Smith, center, and John Carlos, right, were sent home from the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City for their black power salute during the U.S. national anthem at the medal ceremony of the men's 200 meter. Photo: Topfoto/Topham Picturepoin/Ritzau Scanpix

Amid an increase in athlete activism and with the upcoming 2020 Olympics in Tokyo in mind, Thomas Bach, the president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), used his annual New Year's speech to address what he calls "the growing politicisation of sport". Bach also used the spotlight to make it very clear that according to the IOC "The Olympic Games ... are not, and must never be, a platform to advance political or any other potentially divisive ends."

In the wake of Bach's speech, the IOC released a set of guidelines developed by the IOC Athletes' Commission that reiterate the much-debated Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which states that "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas." The guidelines specify that political messaging or gestures of a political nature like kneeling or hand gestures are not permitted during the Olympic Games at all Olympic venues, including the field of play, the Olympic village and during Olympic ceremonies. However, athletes are allowed to express their opinions during press conferences, interviews, and team meetings as well as on digital or traditional media, or other platforms.

But what does the IOC mean by politicisation of sport? This article takes a historic look at opening ceremonies at the Olympic Games and disputed athlete actions to show how politicisation in IOC-terminology differs depending on whether you are an athlete or the host nation that pays to arrange the Olympic spectacle.

A spectacular spectacle of politics
"All the world's a stage" Shakespeare said in his pastoral comedy 'As You Like It'. The quote perfectly describes the modern Olympics and its opening ceremony, which in the present-day serves as a platform for cultural propaganda for the host nation. It is a unique possibility to present a well-produced and staged image of the nation's past and present and gain what in international relations is termed 'soft power'. Unlike 'hard power' - such as military inventions or economic sanctions - soft power is based on persuasion and attraction, which is enabled by the recognition of a country's culture, political values and foreign policy.

In the last decades, nations like China, Russia and Qatar have invested heavily in sporting mega-events - not for the sake of sport but in an understanding of sport as a political tool. However, it was the democratically elected president of the United States, George W. Bush, who dared to change the opening words from the head of state at an opening ceremony of the Olympic Games - an address which the recently released guidelines clearly state must have exactly the same wording every time.

But did the IOC then forget to enforce its rules when Bush - with a not very concealed hint to the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center in 2001 - twisted the opening words of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City?

"On behalf of a proud [read: We are not beaten], determined [read: We are coming after you] and grateful nation [read: Thank you to the nations of the world for supporting the fight against terror]", Bush said, before continuing "I declare open the Games of Salt Lake City, celebrating the Olympic Winter Games."

Even though Bush's addition to the traditional opening declaration may have drawn sympathy, it was also against the rules.

The former president of the United States was also surrounded by American athletes, and during the flag ceremony, a burnt and torn American flag allegedly found in the World Trade Center after the attack was carried by athletes as well as 9/11 police officers and firefighters.

The American flag at the opening ceremony of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City. Photo: U.S. Navy photo by Journalist 1st Class Preston Keres.

The Sochi Olympics: A new history of Russia
In recent years, the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics serve as a prime example of the connection between sport and politics and how nation states use the Olympics as a platform for political messaging. Thomas Bach was quick to praise the Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian organisers for the staging of the Olympics by stating that the Russians fully respected the Olympic Charter.

However, the IOC president must have turned a blind eye to the opening ceremony of the Sochi Games where the political and national symbols were hard to miss. Under the direction of Putin's close ally, the director of the Russian state-owned TV Channel One, Konstantin Ernst, the Russian state took advantage of the opening ceremony to create a picturesque and highly orchestrated image of the country.

In fact, in my research with scholar Andreas Juul Ingvartsen, I have shown that there are two TV versions of the opening ceremony in Sochi: One that was transmitted to the Russian audience, and one for the foreign viewers in countries like Denmark, Norway, Germany, and Australia. There were significant differences between the two versions in terms of political and nationalistic messages. The hammer and sickle - probably the most common symbols of communism during the era of the Soviet Union - were shown 12 times in the Russian version and only 7 times in the international version. The Russian flag was on camera 335 times in the Russian version compared to 117 in the international version. Most notably, however, was that Putin was shown 40 times in the Russian version against only 16 times in the international version.

In one of the segments of the opening ceremony at the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, large elements from the Soviet statue "The Worker and the Kolkhoz Woman", which include the "hammer and sickle", floated across the stadium floor accompanied by dramatic music. Photo: The Korean Olympic Committee/Korea.net

Overall, the Russian state used the opening ceremony to create a national narrative that glorified the Czarist and Soviet era. The political aspects of Soviet communism fell into oblivion and instead its economic and social aspects were hailed as a backdrop to today's modern Russian state. In a segment entitled 'Moscow/The Dream', the Soviet industrialisation from the 1950s and onwards was portrayed almost as a consumer paradise and a regulated welfare state, which is far from the truth. There was no mentioning of the more catastrophic and devastating aspects of Stalin's regime such as political repression, mass extermination and the forced industrialisation.

In this way, not only does the IOC provide the host nation with the most wanted TV platform with a reach of billions of viewers to express its political agendas, but it also allows the host nation to completely rewrite parts of its history in order to make it fit a more perfect image.

Same same, but different - the cases of Beijing and London
In 2008, the Chinese organisers also used the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Beijing for political self-promotion. The opening ceremony was for example used to signal ethnic integration in the world's most populated country with more than 1.4 billion people. Children in national costumes from the 56 different ethnic groups in China carried the national flag into the stadium before handing it to Chinese military personnel who oversaw the hoisting of the flag. It later turned out that the children were not at all representatives from all the different ethnicities, but only from the ethnic group of Han Chinese, which makes up 92 per cent of the population.

'Suffragettes' at the rehearsal of the opening ceremony at the 2012 London Olympics. Photo: Andy Miah/Flickr

Democratic nations also understand the unique opportunity that the opening ceremony offers in terms of selling a positive narrative of the nation's culture and history. The 2012 Olympics in London had a special agenda in advocating for Western values such as open and tolerant communities in a tribute to the British welfare system, multiculturalism, women's liberation and civil rights, just as human rights activists helped carry the Olympic flag. As with all Olympic ceremonies, the darker sides of British history were omitted including the repression of Ireland, colonialism, slavery, and the downsides of the industrialisation like pollution and child labour.

Freedom of expression - but not for all
It is a paradox, that while the IOC never in the long history of the Olympics has enforced Rule 50 on a host nation for its use of ceremonies to stage nationalistic and political messages, it is quite a different matter when it comes to the athletes.

One of the clearest examples of the limitation of athletes' freedom of expression happened at the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City. During the playing of the U.S. national anthem at the medal ceremony of the men's 200 meters, Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised a black-gloved fist - a black power salute and symbolic gesture showing their dissatisfaction with their home country's race policy. Their political statement subsequently resulted in condemnation by the sports authorities and repatriation in disgrace while they were also being asked to return their gold and bronze medals.

At the same Olympics in 1968, Czechoslovakian Vera Caslavska captured the world's attention when she turned her head down and away from the Soviet flag when the Soviet anthem was played at two medal ceremonies. A politicisation of sport? Not according to the IOC. Caslavska was later awarded the Olympic Order for her "particularly distinguished contribution to the Olympic Movement" and in 1989 she was awarded the Pierre de Coubertin International Fair Play Trophy by UNESCO for her "exemplary dignity". A great fight for human rights in the U.S. was not accepted, but opposition to Soviet rule was praised.

While Smith and Carlos' demonstration was condemned by the IOC in 1968, it is now praised at The Olympic Museum's 'Change Makers' section with tributes to the two athletes' raised fists as well as a headline saying: "When the podium becomes a stage - Denouncing poverty and racism." Also, the two Americans were recently inducted into the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Hall of Fame - 51 years after their iconic moment. But what is praised at The Olympic Museum will not be allowed at the Olympics in Tokyo as the new guidelines specifically state that no raised fists are allowed.

While the above example dates back more than half a century, athletes today are facing similar punishments for expressing themselves politically at sports events. Recently at the Pan-American Games in Lima 2019, U.S. athletes Gwen Berry and Race Imboden were put on a year's probation by the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee for respectively raising a clenched fist and kneeling during the national anthem in protest of the U.S. gun policy, racism, and treatment of immigrants - and according to fencer Race Imboden also in protest of what he calls Trump's spread of hatred in American society.

Apolitical in any case? Not really
The IOC's own aspiration of being a globally recognised peacemaker does not make it easier to uphold the image of a completely apolitical sports body. This was clearly illustrated at the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in Pyeongchang. For the first time in the history of the Olympic Movement, the IOC allowed a joint ice hockey team from South and North Korea to compete at the Games, even though the team from North Korea was not qualified.

With the approval of the IOC, the opening ceremony once again became a platform for mixing sport and politics. Firstly, by allowing South and North Korea to march under one flag at the parade of nations. Secondly, by allowing a female ice hockey player from both South and North Korea to carry the Olympic torch side by side into the Olympic Stadium. Thirdly, by staging a handshake in the VIP box between the South Korean president and Kim Yo-jong, the sister of the North Korean president.

On that occasion, the IOC spared no efforts in highlighting its ability to unite nations in conflict and the significance of 'the Olympic Truce', an international ceasefire established by the IOC together with the United Nations.

Four years earlier, the IOC was less eager to react when Crimea was annexed by the Russian Federation just as the lights of the closing ceremony of the 2014 Sochi Olympics were fading. The IOC president praised "the new Russia" without a word about the violation of the Olympic Truce which was in effect until the end of the following Winter Paralympics. Neither did the IOC show compassion with the Ukrainian team at the Winter Paralympics. They were not allowed to wear black armbands in respect of their fallen countrymen.

While the newly released guidelines developed by the IOC Athletes' Commission are surely more transparent in terms of what is not allowed at the Olympic venues, it will be interesting to see whether or not Rule 50 applies to both athletes and the host nations in the future.

Comment

* required field

Guidelines for posting
Play the Game promotes an open debate on sport and sports politics and we strongly encourage everyone to participate in the discussions on playthegame.org. But please follow these simple guidelines when you write a post:

1. Please be respectful - even if you disagree strongly with certain viewpoints. Slanderous or profane remarks will not be posted.

2. Please keep to the subject. Spam or solicitations of any kind will not be posted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A fist of freedom or a fist of iron? Rule 50 and the Olympic paradox

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
IOC President Thomas Bach made it very clear in his New Year's speech that politics should be kept out of the Olympics to protect the event's neutrality. However, it is a paradox that IOC's characterisation of politicisation only seems to apply to athletes and not the host nations, writes Play the Game's analyst Stanis Elsborg.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Beijing Olympics, Athletes' Rights, and Human Rights in Sport Media Briefing

# data[].attributes.body
Whether you are on this planet or Mars. People everywhere should have the right to freely speak about the injustices that they see or experience themselves.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
21 April 2021: The International Olympic Committee's (IOC) archaic approach to limiting athletes' rights to freedom of expression is another sign of an outdated sport system that continues to suppress athletes' fundamental rights. The competitors are humans first, athletes second.

We acknowledge that the IOC conducted a survey among athlete groups. Global Athlete had the IOC's survey independently reviewed by several social science research experts that concluded the research methodology was both leading and flawed.

"One cannot survey how people feel about human rights and freedom of expression. These types of surveys only empower the majority when it is the minority that want and need to be heard. Once again, the IOC has favoured suppression over expression," said Irish Karate Athlete, World Champion Kickboxer and Global Athlete Start Up Athlete Member, Caradh O'Donovan.

Today's recommendations further dictates when, where, and what athletes can speak. This is the opposite to freedom of expression.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "everyone has the right to freedom of expression; this right includes freedom to impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." The Olympic podium is a media of communication to the world, and the Olympic frontier cannot be a barrier to human rights.

Global Athlete hopes every athlete attending the Olympic and Paralympic Games uses the United Nations Human Rights Declaration to guide their decision on when and where to exercise their right to stand for social and racial injustice. Do not allow outdated "sport rules" to supersede your basic human rights.

-ENDS-

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The International Olympic Committee's Rule 50 Continues to Suppress Athletes' Rights to Freedom of Expression - Global Athlete

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
21 April 2021: The International Olympic Committee's (IOC) archaic approach to limiting athletes' rights to freedom of expression is another sign of an outdated sport system that continues to suppress athletes' fundamental rights. The competitors are humans first, athletes second. We acknowledge that the IOC conducted a survey among athlete groups.

# data[].attributes.headline
It is the responsibility of sport governing bodies to establish the structures which specifically support and encourage their humanitarian athletes who strive to live up to the values of Olympism. This starts with changing the language and rules that prohibit athletes’ freedom of expression during sporting events.

# data[].attributes.subject
It is the responsibility of sport governing bodies to establish the structures which specifically support and encourage their humanitarian athletes who strive to live up to the values of Olympism. This starts with changing the language and rules that prohibit athletes’ freedom of expression during sporting events.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Megan Rapinoe is one of the athletes, who has often used her platform to speak out against injustice both in and outside of sport. Photo: Lorie Shaull/Wikimedia Commons

During this time of civil unrest around the globe, an increasing number of voices are joining the chorus to put an end to systemic racism and police brutality including athletes at all levels - Olympic/Paralympic, professional, intercollegiate, and interscholastic. A number of today's athletes are taking actions that would define them as humanitarians. Within the sportscape, this can take many forms, one of which is the philosophy of life known as Olympism.

Yet these humanitarian athletes who exemplify Olympism may not always be supported in their stances by sporting world. Sport governing bodies, however, have the ability to serve and facilitate humanitarian athletes who choose to live their lives in the spirit of Olympism. The purpose of this article, on the occasion of Olympic Day, is to reflect on the ability of these athletes to speak out and how their respective sport governing bodies can assist in getting their message out to the public.

First, however, we need to provide baseline definitions and examples of humanitarians and Olympism, and then we will follow up with the role sport governing bodies can play in supporting athletes who wish to promote the social justice agendas important to them.

Defining what it means to be a humanitarian
What does it mean to be a humanitarian? A career guide defines it thus: "A humanitarian is someone who actively engages in promoting human welfare and social reforms, and who has no prejudice with human suffering on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or national divisions. A humanitarian's goal is to save lives, relieve suffering, and maintain human dignity. This can be done in the form of rescuing and providing safety for refugees, providing shelter and food for the homeless, or helping people in the aftermath of natural disasters or civil unrest".

While all of these are important, this article will focus primarily on athletes who take an advocacy stance related to civil unrest as we see in the current global groundswell of support for an end to racism and police brutality.

Humanitarians around the world embody the definition above. Examples of well-known humanitarians include Martin Luther King, Desmond Tutu, Nelson Mandela, Greta Thunberg, and Malala Yousafzai, while Muhammad Ali is an example of an athlete humanitarian.

An important element or dimension of being a humanitarian is advocacy. Humanitarians, with their goal to maintain human dignity, are advocates for the causes they represent and care about. We can see this as a common thread connecting the humanitarians mentioned above.

Humanitarian actions and Olympism
As we are interested here in the sporting context, how do we see humanitarian actions in the world of sport?

One expression of humanitarianism in the sporting context is Olympism which represents the values and philosophy of the Olympic Movement developed by Pierre de Coubertin and articulated in the Olympic Charter. The Principles of Olympism have evolved and developed over time. The current text for Olympism in the Olympic Charter highlights humanitarianism in the following Principles:

Principle 1. Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example, social responsibility and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.

Principle 2. The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.

Principle 4.The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

Principle 6. The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Olympic Charter shall be secured without discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

According to sports historian Norbert Müller, the Principles of Olympism reinforce humanitarian messages and themes through:

1. The conscious commitment in athletic action to ethical principles and the adherence thereto

2. Human respect and tolerance towards fellow players, e.g. in the fair play ideal

3. Social encounters and understanding in sport

4. Peace and international understanding

5. The promotion of emancipatory developments in and through sport (e.g. participation of athletes, emancipation of women, protection of nature, etc.).

Aligned with humanitarianism, the active language in the Principles of Olympism reinforces a call for engagement, and seemingly encourages the same advocacy by athletes displayed by humanitarians outside of the sporting realm.

Examples of athletes engaging in advocacy grounded in humanitarianism and Olympism include the historic salute by Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968 Mexico Olympic Games, and the trend has continued with Megan Rapinoe kneeling at United States Women's National Team international friendlies, the salute and kneeling gestures at the 2019 Pan Am Games by USA athletes Gwen Berry and Race Imboden, and finally English Premier League players taking a knee and wearing jerseys emblazoned with Black Lives Matter on the back as the league began action in June 2020.

Basic tenets of good governance in sport
While these athletes certainly have the platform to get their message out to thousands via social media, podium protests, wearing kit with supportive messages, and joining in marches, they do not always feel supported in taking their public stances.

What can create an environment in which athletes would feel not only free to express their views but also supported in their humanitarian actions? This is where sport governing bodies can play an important role.

In the book 'Governance and policy in sport organizations', sport governance is defined as "the exercise of power and authority in sport organizations, including policy making, to determine organizational mission, membership, eligibility, and regulatory power, within the organization's appropriate local, national, or international scope."

While this is a solid baseline definition, good governance transcends it and includes numerous tenets, of which the most frequently mentioned are democracy, solidarity, accountability, and transparency.

The chart included in this article illustrates how the basic tenets of good governance can serve as a base of support for athletes who wish to express their advocacy positions. Democracy implies a freedom of expression. Solidarity reinforces support and unity. Accountability means people are responsible for the ramifications of their actions. Finally, transparency includes not only letting the light shine into an organization from the outside but also letting the light shine out from the inside. When these pillars of good governance are present, athletes can feel their voices, are not just allowed to heard, but encouraged to be heard.

Commonwealth Games Federations opens up for athlete advocacy
Let's take a look at some selected sport governing bodies and their actions relative to this topic.

In June 2020, The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) issued an open letter signed by President Dame Louise Martin and Chief Executive David Grevemberg stating, "Surely it is time for the world of sport to grant itself a social and moral licence. A licence to use all its platforms to encourage athletes, coaches, officials, sponsors, administrators and fans to inspire, to educate, to stand for what they believe in. A licence to provide the scope and freedom for all our participants to be agents of change, advocates of integrity and ambassadors for respect, impartiality and non-discrimination."

In contrast, the IOC takes a different approach. Rule 50 in the Olympic Charter states "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas"

Almost 60 years after Tommie Smith and John Carlos, "Displaying any political messaging, including signs or armbands", "Gestures of a political nature, like a hand gesture or kneeling" and "Refusal to follow the Ceremonies protocol" are still subject to disciplinary action.

While IOC president Thomas Bach touted potential revision of Article 50 through consultation with the IOC Athletes Commission, criticism about bans on demonstrations at the Olympic and Paralympic Games have intensified. For example, Global Athlete has called upon the IOC to act immediately to abolish Rule 50 in order to align with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which outlines the right of freedom and expression.

Rules not always in line with policies of sports organizations
The Bundesliga (German Football League) recently saw Schalke's Weston McKennie, Mönchengladbach's Marcus Thuram, and Dortmund's Jadon Sancho and Achraf Hakimi all speaking out, showing solidarity with and demanding justice for George Floyd. As these players chose to express their solidarity through statements on their game apparel, they could be held accountable for their actions.

Political statements on game apparel are forbidden by the Deutsche Fussball Liga (DFL), the Deutscher Fussball-Bund (DFB), as well as FIFA.

Outlined under Law 4 in the Laws of the Game, FIFA states: "Equipment must not have any political, religious or personal slogans, statements or images. Players must not reveal undergarments that show political, religious, personal slogans, statements or images, or advertising other than the manufacturer's logo. For any offence the player and/or the team will be sanctioned by the competition organizer, national football association or by FIFA."

The ambiguity in the statements of the soccer governing organizations leaves sport organizations room for interpretation. In the case of the Bundesliga players, while a DFB led investigation had to be initiated due to the governing rules, both DFB president Fritz Keller and FIFA president Gianni Infantino expressed their support with the anti-racism statements. These statements were consistent with the on-going anti-racism efforts of FIFA and DFB.

Sports bodies must support humanitarian athletes
Good governance helps support the case that humanitarian athletes who speak out for causes grounded in the principles of Olympism should be granted freedom of expression and all of the rights and freedoms that accompany good governance.

While the CGF openly expressed their support for athlete advocacy, we still see hesitancy in support for athlete freedom of expression from other major sport governing bodies. Even though the rules are blamed, those very same rules are part of governance structures which silence athletes in their humanitarian efforts.

Sport has the power to inform, empower and transform. In the pursuit of ending systematic racism and police brutality, athletes have the power to inform and empower their communities to come together and transform the systems which currently promulgate injustice.

It is the responsibility of sport governing bodies to establish the structures which specifically support and encourage their humanitarian athletes who strive to live up to the values of Olympism. This starts with changing the language and rules that prohibit athletes' freedom of expression during sporting events.

Through the examples of humanitarians, the principles of Olympism, and the support framework of good governance, there is indeed a strong case for the place of athlete advocacy in and through sport. Through this article, we have attempted to provide a unique and different perspective that contributes to the conversation and shapes the dialogue regarding the place of athlete advocacy and its central role and contribution in sport and in society.

On this Olympic Day, we hope that athlete advocacy secures a safe and welcoming place in sport, a place where athletes are free to use their public platform to speak out on the issues of the day not only without fear of reprisal, but with authentic support from their sporting homes.

Comment

* required field

Guidelines for posting
Play the Game promotes an open debate on sport and sports politics and we strongly encourage everyone to participate in the discussions on playthegame.org. But please follow these simple guidelines when you write a post:

1. Please be respectful - even if you disagree strongly with certain viewpoints. Slanderous or profane remarks will not be posted.

2. Please keep to the subject. Spam or solicitations of any kind will not be posted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Making a case for athlete advocacy: Humanitarians, Olympism and good governance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Megan Rapinoe is one of the athletes, who has often used her platform to speak out against injustice both in and outside of sport. Photo: Lorie Shaull/Wikimedia Commons During this time of civil unrest around the globe, an increasing number of voices are joining the chorus to put an end to systemic racism and police brutality including athletes at all levels - Olympic/Paralympic, professional, intercollegiate, and interscholastic.

# data[].attributes.headline
Inspired by Kerry Kennedy’s book and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Speak Truth to Power is a human rights education program that combines storytelling and interactive learning to provide the next generation with the concrete knowledge they will need to create change and advance human rights.

# data[].attributes.subject
Inspired by Kerry Kennedy’s book and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Speak Truth to Power is a human rights education program that combines storytelling and interactive learning to provide the next generation with the concrete knowledge they will need to create change and advance human rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Speak Truth to Power is a human rights education program that combines storytelling and interactive learning to foster the next generation of defenders.

# data[].attributes.body
Great collection of blog posts on Freedom of Expression in the Olympic Movement, including my piece on the evolution of Rule 50 & how to challenge it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Freedom of Expression in the Olympic Movement – Verfassungsblog

# data[].attributes.headline
"Freedom of expression is the foundation of human rights.." 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Freedom of expression is the foundation of human rights.." 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Olympian basketball player Yelena Leuchanka has become one the latest examples of athlete activism with a female face. Photo: Belarusian Sport Solidaritys Foundation

"I was born in the former Soviet Union where you couldn't speak freely about what was on your mind, and everyone had to be the same. I grew up in a small town where you had to stand in line for milk and bread. Never did I think that basketball would help me to get to a point in my life where I can express my opinion, where I matter and can be heard."

The Olympian basketball player Yelena Leuchanka has become one the latest examples of athlete activism with a female face. At the end of September 2020, the former WNBA star and member of the national team in Belarus was sentenced to 15 days in prison for taking part in peaceful demonstrations against President Aleksander Lukashenko - the ruler of Belarus for more than 26 years and widely labelled as 'Europe's last dictator'.

Since her arrest, Yelena Leuchanka has become a role model for thousands of protesting people in her country who for months have been beaten and jailed by Lukashenko's riot police.

It can be argued that the current wave of athlete activism set off four years ago, when American football star Colin Kaepernick from San Francisco 49ers introduced his famous protest against police brutality and racial inequality in the US by kneeling during the national anthem at NFL games.

Since then, Kaepernick's silent protest has been adopted by elite athletes across sports and national borders who now take a knee to express sympathy with the anti-racist cause.

But athlete activism has widened. It is no longer targeting racism only, and athlete activism is no longer having a masculine face only. The wind of change increasingly comes with a female face.

A new generation of women has taken up the fight for their rights and for social justice at all levels in sport and has the potential of changing the male dominated management of sport in an even more fundamental way than athletes taking a knee.

High profile athletes like Beckie Scott, Megan Rapinoe, Venus Williams, Gwen Berry, Caster Semenya, Yuliya Stepanova, Khalida Popal, Rachel Denhollander, Kara Goucher, Ada Hegerberg, Pernille Harder, Aleksandra Herasimenia, Yelena Leuchanka, and Aleksandra Shelton, all have become international role models thanks to their public protests over the management of sport.

By speaking up about harassment of athletes, equal pay, freedom of speech, gender politics, sexual abuse, doping, democracy, transparency, and a lot of other issues, the female voices echo what older generations of female athletes fought for decades ago with limited success.

A clear tendency
"In 1980, we were a number of women who put focus on equality in sport. Our focus was primarily on the structure and the top management of sport. But since then there has been only little change in these areas," says Else Trangbæk, the first female gymnast to represent Denmark at the Olympic Games.

Trangbæk competed at the Olympic Games in Mexico City where one of the first and most iconic examples of athlete activism took place as American athletic medalists John Carlos and Tommie Smith raised a black-gloved fist - a symbol of the Black Power movement - at the medal podium.

52 years later, the professor emerita at the Department of Exercise and Sports Science at the University of Copenhagen and European winner of the 2020 IOC Women and Sport Award for her life-long advocacy of gender equality in sport points at the huge amount of money in modern elite sport as a key factor in the way the new generation of women in sport focus on equality.

"The arrival of money in elite sport has resulted in some changes, even though there is less money in women's sport. Women raise new questions. Professional women in sport have new demands. And the role of the media has changed fundamentally too and can help focus attention on the significant women's problems," Trangbæk says.

"Earlier, there was a relatively narrow focus on equality in sport. Today, women in sport focus on many different issues that are related directly to their sports. To me, this is a clear tendency."

A challenge to the IOC
In Belarus, Yelena Leuchanka is not only a national role model. She is also a challenge to the world's leading sports organisation, the International Olympic Committee (IOC), to whom the athlete-lead Belarusian Sport Solidarity Foundation have turned to for help in their fight for the human right to express political opinions.

The Belarusian athletes want the IOC to act on the fact that protesting athletes are kicked out of their clubs and the national teams for political reasons by loyal supporters of Lukashenko, who for 23 years has been accepted by the IOC as head of the national Olympic Committee (NOC) in Belarus.

"Earlier this year when an Iranian wrestler was executed, the IOC did not react until after his death. Maybe it is about time for the IOC to get involved now. At the end of the day, without the athletes there would be no Olympics, there would be no sport," Leuchanka tells Play the Game.

"Isn't it what the IOC is all about, to care for the athletes? Isn't it what the rules of the Olympic Charter are about? Isn't it what the IOC stands for? We have asked the IOC for help because our NOC does not fight for us. So who else can we turn to than the IOC? We are like kids turning to their mother for protection."

So far, the mother has not come to rescue her children. In early October, the IOC promised to investigate the situation in Belarusian sport further, but since then there has been silence.

Another view of athletes
On a personal level, Yelena Leuchanka is inspired by protesting athletes in both the US and Europe. To her, the athletes are now being respected for standing up for what they believe in instead of just being ignored:

"The difference for me is that in the US and other democratic countries people can go out and protest and say what is on their minds. In Belarus, it is a totally different thing. Belarus is not a democracy. We are at a different level, we are North Korea," she says.

Leuchanka now feels very honored by the Belarusian people who think of her as a role model for the protest movement in her country and not just as an athlete. And she has no doubt that the present athlete activism in Belarus and other countries are changing athletes' position in both sport and society in general:

"We are changing the way athletes are viewed all over the world. Many people believe we only care about dribbling a ball. But I think many more athletes in the future will stand up for what they believe is right and use their platform in sport to fight for the good of the people."

Many factors in play
This trend of female athletes using their platform not just to fight for equality in sport but also to improve society in general is noted by Paulina Tomczyk, a former member of Poland's national judo team and today General Secretary of EU Athletes, the European federation of player unions and athlete associations.

"For the past five years I have seen a change in the creation of organisations that represent women athletes and in the number of women asking for more equality and speaking out about their rights," Tomczyk notes, believing there are many factors at play.

"It can be quite challenging for a woman even to access sport and be a woman at the same time. Doing professional sport as a woman can be seen by the public as entering a domain that is not really for women. Their performances can be neglected, and they can hear negative, and to be frank, disgusting comments about their bodies and stuff like that," she explains.

"Standing up to something like that and fighting for your own personal justice may empower you strongly to think that maybe you should also do something for the society at large. And I think that since sport is an important part of society there are parallel trends that goes hand in hand. The Caster Semenya case happened at the same time as discussions increased in society about "non-normal" people and everything that is related to that. One provokes the other. Generally, it is the same with issues like gender equality and pregnancy, really personal stuff that women have to fight for and then can bring forward in more general discussions in society."

A new phenomenon
Paulina Tomczyk also observes that the general trend of athletes being concerned with society probably is related to the increasing popularity of social media.

"The coverage of female athletes in traditional media is much less than the coverage of male athletes. And the reporting on women in sport often follows who they are married to or what kind of outfit they prefer," she said.

According to Tomczyk, that is why many female athletes now use social media where people are free to follow female athletes for whatever reasons and athletes are free to create their own content.

"Some of the most followed athletes on social media are female. It is easy to use social media as an important tool to bring awareness to your case. Back in the old days, athletes mainly had the opportunity to protest at games, on the podium, or in media interviews. Now, they have an opportunity to reach millions of their followers, and I think they use it in a good way," she said while mentioning the Belarusian case as an example.

"It's a really special case. Athletes and other people related to sport have in a way become the leaders, or at least the moral leaders, of the people's movement. This confirms the important role sport has in society. Athletes in general are role models we want to look up to. But for quite some time we have had this philosophy of telling athletes to 'shut up and play'. Now, we are beginning to see them as leaders in this area too. This is a new phenomenon and we still see resistance from the sport governing bodies," Tomczyk says and points to Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter as an example of limitations to the freedom of expression of athletes.

'A nice young lady'
To Tomczyk, sports organisations in general expect athletes to be role models but only if what they say is not too controversial or make the people in power uncomfortable.

"If athletes are speaking out against a sports organisation or a country, very often they are met with repression and attempts to silence them. This is still very visible. But hopefully the trend of athlete activism will make it less frequent," she says.

"For many years, the approach of sports organisations to women's sport was like 'you are lucky to be allowed to play here and you are lucky that we are giving you the t-shirts for free'. Now, women have become much more aware of the fact that they have certain rights. But generally, there is still so much to be done regarding equality for women in sport at all levels."

As an example of her own, Tomczyk mentions that in her work for EU Athletes she is often the only woman on a panel full of grey-haired men and that she has had a personal experience with an old IOC-member addressing her in a ministerial conference as 'a nice young lady':

"I think this is the way men addresses women if they don't like what women are saying. Especially at the highest level. The highest positions in sport are still dominated by men. I think some people in the older generation still feel uncomfortable if someone tries to challenge what they are saying, and that it is even worse for them if it's a young woman."

A team effort
In North America, Olympic Swimmer and Human Rights Lawyer Nikki Dryden sees a difference in athlete activism that is caused by the way male and female athletes are organised:

"While athlete activism on the men's side comes mostly from professional male athletes who have the support of unions behind them, for Olympic female athletes to stand up, they do it without any union support," the Canadian said.

"This means they need sport administrators and even coaches behind them who support what they are doing and empower them to speak out. The rise of female athlete voices corresponds somewhat to the rise of the increased involvement and promotion of female athletes on boards and other women in administration positions. The rise of women involved off the field and in coaching has naturally created space for female athletes' issues to be reviewed and raised."

As an example, Dryden mentions Chelsea Football tailoring training to their athletes' menstrual cycles:

"This provides female athletes with more professional training and elite sport - and create space for women to talk about issues that matter to them," she says.

The Canadian also notes, that whether it is Venus Williams' op-ed in the London Times demanding equal pay at Wimbledon, or Ada Hegerberg boycotting the World Cup for the same reason, these higher profile professional women athletes have played a critical role in paving the way for other female athletes to speak up:

"The rise of the female athlete voice truly is a team effort. From women coaches and administrators to top female athletes and the human rights activists working off the field to support them, there is no stopping us now," Dryden says.

The female face of athlete activism certainly is more visible than ever before. But the answer to where it will lead to for women in sport is still blowing in the wind of change.
Lars Jørgensen is a freelance journalist specialised in international sports politics.

Comment

* required field

Guidelines for posting
Play the Game promotes an open debate on sport and sports politics and we strongly encourage everyone to participate in the discussions on playthegame.org. But please follow these simple guidelines when you write a post:

1. Please be respectful - even if you disagree strongly with certain viewpoints. Slanderous or profane remarks will not be posted.

2. Please keep to the subject. Spam or solicitations of any kind will not be posted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Athlete activism is getting a female face

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Olympian basketball player Yelena Leuchanka has become one the latest examples of athlete activism with a female face. Photo: Belarusian Sport Solidaritys Foundation "I was born in the former Soviet Union where you couldn't speak freely about what was on your mind, and everyone had to be the same.

# data[].attributes.headline
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished?  Raise our voices / Work to change policies / Involve governments / Other (please comment) 

# data[].attributes.subject
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished?  Raise our voices / Work to change policies / Involve governments / Other (please comment) 

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression
— Athletes 4 Rights (@athletes4rights) February 16, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
After Beijing 2022, how can the sport and human rights community best ensure that the right to freedom of expression for people in the sport community is "never again" limited, threatened, or punished? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.headline
It is time for sport to change. Freedom of expression and differing (even critical) viewpoints must be protected and encouraged - across sports, events, organisations and institutions. We can be critical because we care and want to ensure sport is more equitable, accessible and inclusive - and plays a greater role in positively shaping society.

# data[].attributes.subject
It is time for sport to change. Freedom of expression and differing (even critical) viewpoints must be protected and encouraged - across sports, events, organisations and institutions. We can be critical because we care and want to ensure sport is more equitable, accessible and inclusive - and plays a greater role in positively shaping society.

# data[].attributes.body
Dr Ben Sanders
The international platform on sport and development
sportanddev.org

# data[].attributes.headline
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? Nothing / Lip-service HR strategy / Comprehensive HR strategy / Other (please comment)

# data[].attributes.subject
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? Nothing / Lip-service HR strategy / Comprehensive HR strategy / Other (please comment)

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression
— Athletes 4 Rights (@athletes4rights) February 16, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
After Beijing 2022, what do you anticipate the IOC will do to ensure the right to freedom of expression? https://t.co/LJOLaQNetA #Beijing2022FreedomofExpression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Share your messages of support and encouragement for freedom of expression throughout the Beijing 2022 Olympic & Paralympic Games and beyond.

# data[].attributes.headline
Despite the opportunity to make a positive legal change to protect the human rights of athletes at the Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee’s failure to embed human rights into the Olympic Charter now means athletes at the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing are facing even more severe restrictions to their freedom of expression rights.

# data[].attributes.subject
Despite the opportunity to make a positive legal change to protect the human rights of athletes at the Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee’s failure to embed human rights into the Olympic Charter now means athletes at the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing are facing even more severe restrictions to their freedom of expression rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite the opportunity to make a positive legal change to protect the human rights of athletes at the Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee's failure to embed human rights into the Olympic Charter now means athletes at the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing are facing even more severe restrictions to their freedom of expression rights.

For several years leading into the rescheduled Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games the International Olympic Committee (IOC), in cooperation with the IOC Athletes Commission, completed athlete surveys that built on several iterations of guidelines starting in 2014.

The newest guidelines published ahead of Tokyo and mirrored for Beijing guidelines appear to purposefully confuse the situation. They use words like "international human rights" and "due process," out of context, failing to get to the heart of the problem, and therefore in my opinion the IOC's approach is fatally flawed.

As I have stated before, the key problem with Rule 50.2 is that it "continues to deny athletes their inalienable human right to free expression on the podium and in the opening and closing ceremonies; critical moments where live TV cannot edit minority views."[1] I believe it should not be left to organisations like the IOC to make up reasons to curtail free expression, it should only be done in certain justified and limited exceptions as outlined in international rules. The political "neutrality of sport" is not a reason to violate the human rights of Olympic athletes.

In addition, athletes add to Beijing are at even greater risk. By failing to clearly protect the human rights of athletes in the Olympic Charter, the IOC has exposed athletes to Chinese authorities, known to restrict freedom of expression[2] and whom in January 2022 directly threatened athletes from speaking out at the Winter Olympics[3].

I originally wrote about this in an article in August 2020, which examined the difficulty in reconciling the objectives of the IOC and Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, with athletes fundamental human right to freedom of expression at the Olympic Games.[4] A number of recommendations were made to resolve the issues the article presented. The IOC appears to have attempted to implement some of them through amending guidelines, however, the result is further confusion. Therefore, it is important to reiterate several recommendations that if adopted, would greatly improve the IOC's rules and ensure the human rights of athletes are prioritised and protected.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Rule 50 still isn't working for athletes - Beijing 2022 Olympic Winter Games

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite the opportunity to make a positive legal change to protect the human rights of athletes at the Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee's failure to embed human rights into the Olympic Charter now means athletes at the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing are facing even more severe restrictions to their freedom of expression rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Ukrainian skeleton racer held up a sign that said "No War in Ukraine" to a television camera after finishing a race Friday, bringing the first overt political statement to an Olympics that has been bracing for athlete protests.

After finishing his third of four heats in the men's skeleton race, Vladyslav Heraskevych got off his sled and held up the small sign, which had his message printed in English. China's state broadcaster captured the moment on its telecast of the race.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ukrainian Athlete Makes First Overt Political Statement of the Beijing Olympics, Asking for 'No War'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Ukrainian skeleton racer held up a sign that said "No War in Ukraine" to a television camera after finishing a race Friday, bringing the first overt political statement to an Olympics that has been bracing for athlete protests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Irwin Cotler is the Canadian co-chair of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, a former federal justice minister and a longtime parliamentarian. Yonah Diamond, the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights' Legal Counsel, made contributions.
In early 2001, as the member of Parliament for Mount Royal, I announced in the House of Commons a list of categories of human-rights violations that could serve to measure China's international standing. On the eve of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, I released a report indicting China's failure to meet those bars. I also warned that those Beijing Games risked turning into the "Genocide Olympics" following reports of China's complicity in the Darfur genocide, as Sudan's principal small-arms supplier.

Emboldened by the international community's indifference and indulgence, the Chinese government has gone on to perpetrate its own crimes against humanity and genocide against Uyghurs and other indigenous peoples, as concluded by expert reports, rights organizations and an independent tribunal. After the U.S. determined that China is committing genocide, Canada's House of Commons became the first parliament to unanimously recognize it; followed by others, including the U.K., Netherlands, France and Lithuania.

What we were already witnessing in 2001 and 2008 was China's pervasive assaults on human rights, which fly in the face of the Olympic values of excellence, friendship and respect.What we are seeing today, as China hosts the games for a second time in 14 years, is the utter betrayal and abandonment of the Olympic Charter.

In preparation for the 2008 Olympics, China intensified its crackdown on journalists, lawyers, and activists. In 2006, Uyghur Canadian citizen Huseyin Celil was arrested in Uzbekistan and sent to China, where he was sentenced to life in prison for championing Uyghur rights - much of which spent in solitary confinement. No one has heard from him since 2016. Practitioners of the spiritual group Falun Gong were also forcibly disappeared in the thousands in the lead-up to the 2008 games. In 2019, an independent tribunal found that China was committing crimes against humanity against the group, including forced organ harvesting. Canadian Sun Qian was arrested in 2017 and, three years later, was sentenced to eight years in prison after being subjected to torture - all for practising Falun Gong.
The domestic fault lines of China's transformation Should Canada host the Olympics again in 2030? Not if we have to pay for it
In 2008, China was violently suppressing protests in Tibet, a region already subject to severe restrictions. Since then, the government has systematically separated Tibetan children from their families, with nearly 80 per cent now in state-run boarding schools that erase their cultural identity. Tibetans are subjected to widespread forced labour programs, military-style training and "thought education." More than half a million people went through such training in the first seven months of 2020 alone.

Another dramatic development since 2008 has been China's frontal assault not only on the democracy movement in Hong Kong, but on democracy itself.

Recently, China has forcibly disappeared women for speaking out about sexual assault, including Huang Xueqin, a journalist and leading voice in China's MeToo movement. Beijing also appears to have coerced former world No. 1 tennis star Peng Shuai into silence and recanting her allegations that a former vice premier of China, Zhang Gaoli, had forced her into sex.

During the initial outbreak of COVID-19, China punished or disappeared truth-tellers sounding the alarm. Dr. Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist at the Central Hospital of Wuhan, was detained for "spreading false rumours" and forced to sign a document denouncing his forewarning of a SARS-like virus in December, 2019. He contracted the virus and died weeks later. Citizen journalist Zhang Zhan is serving a four-year prison term for documenting the COVID-19 outbreak, including overflowing hospitals and Wuhan's crematorium in constant operation.

China went from tightly controlling the internet in 2008 to enhancing surveillance through facial, emotion and even ethnicity-recognition technology, including a Huawei-tested "Uyghur alarm." In 2008, China at least demonstrated a pretense for tolerating protest during the Olympics. Today, there has been a complete clampdown on dissent.

In 1936, the fencer Helene Mayer was the only German athlete of Jewish ancestry that the Third Reich allowed to participate in the Berlin Olympics, as a token to Western countries alarmed by the Nazis' rise. So when China chose an Olympian of Uyghur descent to light the Olympic cauldron, the similarities were chilling.

When asked about the International Olympic Committee's position on the Uyghurs, president Thomas Bach deemed their plight to be a "political issue" - a mockery of his own oath "to fight against all forms of discrimination." Mr. Bach added that if the IOC were to take a stand, the Games would lose their "mission" - one that purports to "place sport at the service of humanity."

But taking a stand is the only way to protect that mission and redeem these "Games of Shame" - for our athletes, and for our common humanity.
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion: Beijing's Games of Shame show how far China's government has fallen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Irwin Cotler is the Canadian co-chair of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, a former federal justice minister and a longtime parliamentarian. Yonah Diamond, the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights' Legal Counsel, made contributions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With a silver medal in women's shot put draped around her neck, U.S. athlete Raven Saunders raised her arms over her head and crossed them into an "X," a gesture she would later clarify to journalists as representing the "intersection of where all people who are oppressed meet."

"Shout out to all my Black people, shout out to all my LBGTQ community, shout out to everybody dealing with mental health," Saunders added. "Because at the end of the day, we understand that it's bigger than us, and it's bigger than the powers that be."

The moment was the first political demonstration on the tiered Olympic podium at the Tokyo Games, deepening the decades-long debate over how athletes can exercise free speech at the global event.

Before Saunders, there had been a series of athletes who protested during the Games. Gwen Berry raised her fist before the women's hammer throw final, weeks after she held up a shirt that read "Activist Athlete" and didn't face the American flag as the national anthem played during the U.S. Olympic trials. American fencer Race Imboden displayed an "X" on his right hand, echoing Saunders' gesture, as he received a bronze medal.

Two years ago, these same two athletes received yearlong probations from the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) for similar demonstrations - Berry raised her fist, Imboden took a knee - during medal ceremonies at the Pan American Games in Peru. This year, neither athlete faced consequences from the International Olympic Committee for their demonstrations, underscoring how the rules have loosened since. But Saunders' case is a reminder that bigger disagreements over the longstanding Olympic ban on athlete protests remain.

The IOC expects the 205 national Olympics committees, a group that includes the USOPC, to mete out punishment for violations of its rules at the Games. But the USOPC defended Saunders in the day following her demonstration. After conducting its own review, the USOPC said in a statement that the "peaceful expression in support of racial and social justice" didn't violate its own rules for demonstration.

The IOC had been in discussion with the USOPC and World Athletics, track and field's international governing body, about the gesture. And on Wednesday, the IOC announced that it was suspending its investigation "for the time being" after the athlete's mother, Clarissa Saunders, died.

https://twitter.com/GiveMe1Shot/status/1422582267793186821

Saunders' protest may not be the last high-profile demonstration at the Olympics, which continue through this Saturday, followed by the Paralympics starting Aug. 24. Saunders, a Black and openly gay athlete, has been outspoken about her struggles with depression and identity. And as long as athletes of marginalized identities reach the podium, some experts say, it's doubtful the desire to take a stand will fade anytime soon.

But this year's Olympic Games may be a "turning point" on this issue, said Letisha Engracia Cardoso Brown, an assistant professor of sociology at Virginia Tech.

"Protests will continue as long as people are athletes and athletes are people with ties to the world," she said. "They exist in this world, and they're impacted by this world. They're going to have feelings and emotions about what's going on."

How did we get here?

The IOC has long described the Olympic Games - and sport in general - as something that exists separately from politics. In its latest guidelines, the IOC said that a "fundamental principle" at the Games is sport is neutral, adding that athletes' expressions within Olympic venues - whether on the field of play during competitions or official ceremonies - "may distract the focus from the celebration of athletes' sporting performances."

Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter reads: "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas." A similar rule appears in the International Paralympic Committee handbook.

In an op-ed in The Guardian late last year, IOC president Thomas Bach reiterated the organization's stance and wrote that the Games "are not about politics."

"The International Olympic Committee, as a civil non-governmental organization, is strictly politically neutral at all times," Bach wrote. In a subsequent statement in the weeks before the Tokyo Games, Bach stood firm on the IOC's position, telling the Financial Times that the podium wasn't a place for demonstrations.

But Rule 50, which has been in the charter in some form since 1975, has been under increasing pressure to change. In December, the USOPC announced it wouldn't discipline athletes for peaceful demonstrations after an athlete-led council offered recommendations for the rule, following the murder of George Floyd and the global protests against racial injustice.

The IOC, bolstered by a worldwide survey showing athletes largely supporting Rule 50, made some clarifications around its ban ahead of the Tokyo Games: Athletes were allowed to speak up in news conferences, on their social media accounts, or protest on the field of play before a competition, but the medal podiums were still no place for political expression.

But the calls for changes did not stop. On the day of the Tokyo Games opening ceremony, more than 150 athletes, academics, and advocates signed an open letter, urging the IOC and the IPC to "make a stronger commitment to human rights, racial/social justice, and social inclusion" by amending the rule and refraining from imposing sanctions on athletes who protest at the Games.

Brown, who was one of the letter's signatories, said "to deny people the opportunity to protest is to silence an essential part of their being."

For Brown, Saunders' "X" was a "beautiful reflection of Black feminism," reminding her of a particular line from the 1977 Combahee River Collective Statement: "If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression."

In an Instagram caption after her televised demonstration, Saunders wrote: "Meet me at the ❌".
'Sport is political'
U.S. sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos most famously tested the IOC's stance against demonstrations during the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City. In a now-iconic image, both athletes, heads bowed and donning black gloves, raised their fists after being awarded their medals in the 200-meter sprint. Atop the podium, they stood in black socks and no shoes, a nod to the poverty Black people faced in the U.S. Smith also wore a scarf to symbolize Black pride. Carlos wore beads in honor of lynching victims.

The athletes' protest of system racism and discrimination against Black people, considered one of the most influential moments in sports history, was met with suspensions from the U.S. team. At home, they were vilified for bringing the subject of human rights to the Olympic stage.

Reflecting on that moment, Smith told the Los Angeles Times that "athletes have a right to say whatever is on their mind, whether it's agreeable to those who are watching or it's thought of negatively."

"We are human beings," he added.

"As an athlete, if I want to protest, I don't really care what the rules are. I really care about the issue," said Kenneth Shropshire, a professor and chief executive of the Global Sport Institute at Arizona State University who was also on the Team USA council that offered revisions for Rule 50.

He pointed to another silent protest at the 1968 Games. Vera Caslavska, a decorated Czech gymnast, shared a gold medal with Soviet gymnast Larisa Petrik in the floor routine and was awarded silver in the balance beam. During both medal ceremonies, she shared the podium with Soviet gymnasts. As the Soviet flag was being raised and the country's anthem played, Caslavska turned her head down and to the right. It was, in part, a protest against the Soviet Union invasion of Czechoslovakia weeks before the Games.

"This does not appear to be an accident," an announcer at the time said of Caslavska's defiant gesture.

Simply, "Sport is political," Shropshire said, adding that there are all kinds of political decisions involved with the Olympic Games that chip away at the notion of neutrality. Think of the Games that have been canceled, he said.

The Games were canceled once during World War I and twice during World War II, including the 1940 Summer Olympics after Tokyo forfeited its position as host city when Japan invaded China a few years prior.

The IOC's guidelines warn against "disruptive" expressions from athletes. But what to make of the "disruptions" from world events outside the Olympic Village?

Notoriously, Adolf Hitler used the ceremonial grandeur of the 1936 Berlin Olympics to promote Nazi propaganda and Aryan supremacy. And despite an attempted U.S. boycott by Jewish groups, Catholic organizations and some Black-owned newspapers, the Berlin Games prevailed. The 18 Black athletes on Team USA, including Jesse Owens, won 14 Olympic medals. Their victories carried a weight greater than athletic excellence. They were upheld as a blow to Hitler's Nazi racist ideology, an argument Owens himself made prior to his participation in the Games. At the same time, these Black American athletes returned to a country with pervasive Jim Crow laws.

In his 1972 autobiography "I Have Changed," Owens reflected on what happened after he came back to the U.S. with his four gold medals, writing "it became increasingly apparent that everyone was going to slap me on the back, want to shake my hand or have me up to their suite. But no one was going to offer me a job."
What lies ahead
When you live at the intersection - at the "X" - you are placed on the margins of society, said Akilah R. Carter-Francique, executive director of the San Jose State University's Institute for the Study of Sport, Society and Social Change.

"If you're not of that dominant population, if you aren't white, if you aren't male, if you aren't upper class and you aren't heterosexual ... you're othered and, oftentimes, your voice is silenced. Your existence in spaces and places and in communities is often invisible or rendered invisible," Carter-Francique said. When that happens, "your own humanity is really reduced and often ignored."

And Sauders, through her protest, is speaking for all those communities, she said. It provided an opportunity for spectators to ask what the "X" represented, as well as understand the issues driving her demonstration. People may find that each of the issues amplified by the athlete "is just not a Raven issue, it is not a U.S. issue, but these issues are happening globally, and they need to be addressed in many of our respective nations," she said.

"If you're not of that dominant population, if you aren't white, if you aren't male, if you aren't upper class and you aren't heterosexual, you're othered.

The IOC didn't specify in its guidelines on how it would punish athletes for violating its updated rule on demonstrations during this year's Games.

Carter-Francique, who also signed the statement to the IOC, said we've seen a departure from the typical marketing for the Olympic Games as this quest for gold. She said when she thinks back to Smith and Carlos raising their fists from the podium, "to get to that stage, it takes a lot of training, takes a lot of strength, takes a lot of hours, and then to have the consciousness and fortitude and support behind you to say, 'I'm going to stand up and speak for my people,' is another state as well," she said.

She hopes the IOC, learning from ongoing discussions over its rule, creates a space for athletes to speak up on various issues, and work with them to create pathways toward education, toward policy creations and revisions to better address these issues that affect multiple nations. It shouldn't matter if they'd earned a spot on the podium.

For Brown, the IOC also risks athletes not wanting to partake in the Games if they're not allowed to "participate to their full extent." She said, in the U.S. in particular, where sports are built off of Black labor, all the Black athletes could band together and say "we're not going to lay down for you to walk all over anymore."

"If the IOC isn't going to make space, I would like to see athletes make the space for themselves," she said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Sport is political.' How athletes are keeping human rights center stage at the Olympics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With a silver medal in women's shot put draped around her neck, U.S. athlete Raven Saunders raised her arms over her head and crossed them into an "X," a gesture she would later clarify to journalists as representing the "intersection of where all people who are oppressed meet."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Athlete mental health was sacrificed during Beijing 2022 Olympics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The well-being of Olympians is of secondary importance is secondary to pomp and profit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The International Olympic Committee, a nongovernmental organization based in Switzerland that's independent of any one nation, was founded in 1894. It's a group of officials who supervise and support the Olympics and set Olympic policies about everything from whether break dancing can be added as an official sport to what's required for an athlete to compete on a team representing a country where they don't normally reside. Because the IOC is often in the news, we asked two sports scholars, Yannick Kluch and Eli Wolff, five questions about what it does and why so many people want it to change how it responds to concerns about human rights and other issues.
1. What are the main things the IOC does?

The IOC coordinates what's known as the Olympic movement, the technical term for the constellation of committees, federations and other bodies that puts on spectacular sporting competitions every two years.

That includes overseeing the 206 national Olympic committees and 35 international sports federations. The IOC also supervises the specific organizing committees formed for every one of the Olympic Games, seven years before the competitions begin.

The IOC's 101 members, many of whom are former athletes, meet at least once a year to make important decisions.

They're responsible for selecting where future Olympic Games will occur, electing their leaders, choosing new Olympic sports and making amendments to the Olympic Charter. The IOC's own officials select candidates for membership in the committee.

Thomas Bach, a German, has served as IOC president since 2013. He regularly convenes its executive board. He represents the IOC during the Games.

The IOC also oversees several humanitarian initiatives such as Peace and Development through Sport,the Olympic Refugee team and the Olympic Solidarity program. The committee has observer status with the United Nations and promotes a worldwide symbolic ceasefire during the Games known as the Olympic Truce resolution.

2. What's the IOC's mission?

The IOC has three main roles. The global nonprofit says "its job is to encourage the promotion of Olympic values, to ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games and its legacy and to support all the organizations affiliated to the Olympic Movement."

In the Olympic Charter the IOC goes into more detail about its principles, articulating the seven fundamental principles of "Olympism."

These include placing "sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity," promoting the "practice of sport [as] a human right," a commitment to political neutrality and shielding athletes from discrimination.

The IOC is also supposed to protect the ethics and integrity of the Olympic movement, prevent athlete abuse and harassment and generally make competitions safe, fair and accessible for all qualifying competitors.

3. How does the IOC get money, and where do those funds go?

About three-quarters of its funds come from the sale of the rights to broadcast the Olympic Games. It gets most of the rest through marketing deals. The IOC collected more than US$5 billion for the 2014 and 2016 Games, the most recent data it has made available.

Because the IOC operates as a nonprofit, its leaders do not manage this money as they might if it were a private company. Instead, the committee distributes 90% of its revenue to national Olympic committees, Olympic athletes and other entities, reserving the rest of the money to cover operational expenses.

The IOC also provides half of the funds used by the World Anti-Doping Association, established in 1999 to research and monitor the use of prohibited medications and treatments by athletes. Governments provide the rest of the association's funding.

Olympic athletes, especially those who compete on U.S. teams, get very low compensation for their participation in the Games, and they are limited in terms of their ability to earn money from marketing deals. Bach, although he is technically a volunteer, earns about $244,000 a year, and other IOC leaders are paid as well.

4. What are some of the controversies the IOC faces?

The IOC's response, in 2014, to proof that the Russian government was sponsoring systematic doping of its athletes has led to widespread criticism for being too lenient and has sparked controversy ever since. To punish the Russian government, without sidelining all Russian athletes from the Games, the IOC permits them to compete as "Olympic Athletes from Russia" without allowing the use of the Russian flag or anthem.

In 2022, doping remained a problem. That became clear when belated test results showed Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva had used a banned heart medication several weeks before she competed in the Olympics. The IOC's response to this news appeared to disappoint all sides.

Separately, the IOC has failed to stop corruption in the bidding process for hosting the Olympics, a longstanding problem most recently exposed with the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro and the Olympic Games held in Tokyo five years later.

Human rights groups have expressed outrage over the IOC's decisions that allowed China to host the Olympic Games in 2008 and 2022.

China faces widespread accusations, including from the U.S. government, that it oppresses Uyghurs in China's western Xinjiang region. This abuse is increasingly considered to constitute genocide.

Many athletes and other people object to China's repression of the Tibetan people. China has also drawn widespread criticism for cracking down on free speech in Hong Kong.

The United States and several other countries cited these concerns in announcing a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Olympics.

Interestingly, the committee states that "at all times, the IOC recognises and upholds human rights" on its website.

The IOC has also come under fire for its Rule 50.

Originally adopted in 1975 as Rule 55, it now states that "no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas." This is the rationale for why the IOC bars athletes from engaging in protests while they compete or during medal ceremonies.

Time and again the IOC has relied on Rule 50 to justify its commitment to what it calls "political neutrality" as a fundamental principle of Olympism - even when that commitment has contradicted one or more aspects of its mission.

5. Is the IOC neutral and apolitical?

Well, it depends on whom you ask.

"The position of the IOC must be, given the political neutrality, that we are not commenting on political issues," Bach said, when asked about the abuse of Uyghurs by China's government at the outset of the Beijing Winter Games. "Because otherwise, if we are taking a political standpoint, and we are getting in the middle of tensions and disputes and confrontations between political powers, then we are putting the Olympics at risk."

In 2020, likewise, Bach wrote that the Olympics "can set an example for a world where everyone respects the same rules and one another."

[ Over 140,000 readers rely on The Conversation's newsletters to understand the world. Sign up today.]

Human rights experts and activists around the world, however, have called the IOC's position to be apolitical a myth and urged the committee to take a stronger stance on human rights abuses.

Shortly before the Tokyo Games began, in the summer of 2021, more than 150 experts on sports, human rights and social justice - including both of us - published an open letter. In it, we called on the IOC to demonstrate a stronger commitment to human rights and social justice.

"Neutrality is never neutral," we argued. "As a reflection of society at large, sport is not immune to the social ills that have created global inequities. ... Staying neutral means staying silent, and staying silent means supporting ongoing injustice."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's the IOC - and why doesn't it do more about human rights issues related to the Olympics?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The International Olympic Committee, a nongovernmental organization based in Switzerland that's independent of any one nation, was founded in 1894. It's a group of officials who supervise and support the Olympics and set Olympic policies about everything from whether break dancing can be added as an official sport to what's required for an athlete to compete on a team representing a country where they don't normally reside.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Feb 18 (Reuters) - The Sport & Rights Alliance on Friday requested a meeting with International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach to discuss what it said were human rights abuses at the Beijing Winter Games, including the doping case involving Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva.

Valieva, 15, was cleared to compete by the Court of Arbitration for Sport despite testing positive for a banned substance in December, but the youngster's Olympic dreams ended in tears when she finished fourth in the women's single event. read more

"This case highlights yet again the ambitious systems of power that puts athletes, especially child athletes, in impossible positions - where medals are often prioritised at the expense of the athletes' physical and mental health," acting director Andrea Florence said in a letter.

The Sport & Rights Alliance is a global coalition of non-governmental organisations that promotes human rights in sport.

The IOC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Earlier on Friday, Bach said it was "chilling" to witness Valieva crumble under pressure and then be berated by her coach as she stepped off the ice. read more

The letter went on to question the IOC's handling of the situation involving Chinese tennis player Peng Shuai, who appeared briefly at the Games to deny earlier accusations that she had been sexually assaulted by a former Chinese Vice-Premier.

"These Games will be remembered for the IOC's complete disregard for human rights... given the human rights catastrophe that was the Beijing Games, the IOC cannot simply return to business as usual," the letter added.

Countries including the United States, Australia, Britain and Japan imposed a diplomatic boycott on the Games owing to China's poor rights record. China denies these allegations.

Reporting by Dhruv Munjal in Bengaluru; Editing by Hugh Lawson

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sport & Rights Alliance urges IOC to act on human rights abuses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Sport & Rights Alliance on Friday requested a meeting with International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach to discuss what it said were human rights abuses at the Beijing Winter Games, including the doping case involving Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a rare rebuke of Beijing, Nils van der Poel, a speedskater, handed one of his gold medals to the daughter of Gui Minhai, a book publisher imprisoned in China.

The Swedish speedskater Nils van der Poel handing his Olympic gold medal to Angela Gui, the daughter of an imprisoned Chinese bookseller, in Cambridge, England, on Thursday. Credit... Mary Turner for The New York Times

The Swedish skating star Nils van der Poel jumped for joy on the podium when he received his gold medal for the men's 10,000-meter speedskating race at the Beijing Winter Olympics. Years of grueling training had brought him the world record-breaking victory.

Even in his moment of glory, though, he had a secret plan: to use his victory to denounce the Chinese government's ferocious clampdown on free speech, dissent and ethnic minorities.

Mr. van der Poel has now acted on that plan. On Thursday, he gave his gold medal to the daughter of Gui Minhai, a Chinese-born Swedish publisher of books critical of Beijing, who is serving a 10-year prison sentence in China. It was the boldest protest yet by an athlete who took part in the Beijing Games.

"I realize that Gui Minhai will not be set free because of this. I realize that the Chinese people will not stop suffering from oppression because of this. But I really, really believe in free speech," Mr. van der Poel said in Cambridge, England, where he handed the medal to Angela Gui, Mr. Gui's daughter, in a small, improvised ceremony.

"I really see myself as the guy holding the microphone in front of Angela," Mr. van der Poel said in an interview before the ceremony. "I just hope that human rights get to stand in the center of this."

From the time they were awarded to China, the 2022 Winter Olympics ignited controversy over the Communist Party's suppression of dissent. Human rights groups called for a boycott, citing China's repression, particularly of the Uyghurs, a Muslim minority, in the Xinjiang region.

During the Games, no athletes openly protested against China. Chinese officials had warned athletes that they could be punished for making comments deemed to be against the law, a threat that Mr. van der Poel said convinced him to abandon an idea to refuse to appear on the medal stand in protest. "I thought that would be a very cool picture," he said.

Mr. van der Poel, 25, has a reputation as an occasional maverick with an arduous training routine and blunt opinions on rivals.

Now he is also something of a loner in using his Olympics fame to openly chastise China's rulers. He described how he went from knowing little about China to honoring Mr. Gui.

"It's surrealistic giving away what you fought for your entire life," he said. "But it also brings a lot more value to the journey - that it's not just me skating around in circles."

Mr. van der Poel said he waited until after the Games to speak out because he worried for his own safety in Beijing and did not want to create a distraction for other athletes. He and Ms. Gui invited a New York Times reporter to their medal handover, but asked that the news be held until Friday, giving them more time to prepare for any reaction.

"I'm a bit intimidated," Ms. Gui said in a small conference room as Mr. van der Poel drew the medal out of its lacquered wooden box. He told her not to worry. "We don't get any instructions either," he said.

Ms. Gui, a 28-year-old graduate student at Cambridge University, said that she knew that others might regard her and Mr. van der Poel as naïve for thinking their gesture could help change China.

"But I also think a little bit of naïveté is important to try to effect change," Ms. Gui said. "I think it's very important that Nils giving me his medal to honor my father is understood as honoring political prisoners like him, many of whom are increasingly Hong Kongers and Uyghurs."

In the years leading up to the Beijing Games, Mr. van der Poel was zealously focused on a training program that involved seven-hour bike rides and seemingly endless circuits of a skate rink. He had little interest in the politics behind the Olympics.

"It was just 'I'm an athlete, I'm going to do what an athlete does, and that's it,'" he said.

Then, in late November, he watched an online presentation by Civil Rights Defenders, a Stockholm-based group that briefs Swedish athletes ahead of international events, especially those in countries with bleak human rights records. That was the first time that Mr. van der Poel learned about Mr. Gui.

Mr. Gui was born in China, and he made a living as a publisher in Hong Kong. His books included lurid, scathing and thinly sourced paperbacks about China's leaders. Their main readership was Chinese travelers who sneaked the books back to mainland China, where there is a big underground appetite for news, and rumor, about the Communist Party elite.

In 2015, Mr. Gui was abducted by Chinese security operatives from a vacation home in Thailand. He was later shown on Chinese state television repeating Beijing's official line that he had willingly returned to China to answer for a fatal car crash that took place over a decade earlier. But even after he had served out a sentence for that charge, Mr. Gui was held in China and not allowed to return to Sweden, where he had gained citizenship in 1992.

The Latest on China: Key Things to Know

Card 1 of 3

In 2018, two Swedish diplomats accompanied Mr. Gui on a train to Beijing, where he was scheduled to undergo a medical examination, but Chinese security officers boarded the train and snatched Mr. Gui away. In 2020, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for "illegally providing intelligence" to a foreign recipient. Ms. Gui and others have said that charge was absurd, as Mr. Gui was under constant surveillance and could not have acquired any real secrets.

In the months before the Olympics, Mr. van der Poel said, he researched Mr. Gui's case. He was troubled, he said, by the idea that Mr. Gui, who like him is a Swedish citizen, could be abducted while abroad and then sentenced to prison.

"I felt I was obligated to do something since I had the opportunity that very few people have," Mr. van der Poel said.

In Beijing, he broke his own world record in the 10,000-meter race, beating the runner-up by almost 14 seconds. He also won a gold in the 5,000-meter race, an event in which he broke the world record last year.

Soon after the Games ended, he told a Swedish news outlet that it was "extremely irresponsible" to allow the Olympics to be held there, given China's oppressive politics.

Mr. van der Poel's medal gesture may anger China's authorities. They have presented the Winter Olympics as a vindication of China's political system of centralized control - efficient, disciplined, confident - before a global audience.

The International Olympic Committee, under pressure from athlete groups and human rights organizations, last year relaxed a decades-old regulation on protest. But the committee still maintained tough restrictions on Olympic participants, denying them the right to make their statements on the Games' highest-profile platforms, like medal podiums or the fields of play.

Peter Reinebo, who was responsible for Sweden's Olympic team in Beijing, gave his backing to Mr. van der Poel, who told Mr. Reinebo of his plan during the Games.

"I said to him, I will support you all the way because I think it's a great gesture from a big sportsman to also show his true values and values of human rights," Mr. Reinebo said.

At their impromptu ceremony in Cambridge, Mr. van der Poel joked that it was a little easier to give away a gold medal because he had two. "At least I can show something to my grandmother," he said.

Ms. Gui said she hoped that Mr. van der Poel might one day get his medal back.

"Perhaps when the last political prisoner is released, then you can have it back," she said, "and you can show your grandma."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Swedish Olympic Star Gives Away Gold Medal to Protest Beijing's Abuses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a rare rebuke of Beijing, Nils van der Poel, a speedskater, handed one of his gold medals to the daughter of Gui Minhai, a book publisher imprisoned in China. The Swedish skating star Nils van der Poel jumped for joy on the podium when he received his gold medal for the men's 10,000-meter speedskating race at the Beijing Winter Olympics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CREDIT: REUTERS/FABRIZIO BENSCH

Given the human rights catastrophe that was the Beijing Games, the IOC cannot simply return to business as usual.

Read the full letter to IOC President Thomas Bach below:

Dr. Thomas Bach, President,

International Olympic Committee

The unfortunate circumstances of Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva's doping case are representative of the wider governance failures by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the IOC. Despite warnings and comprehensive reform recommendations by World Players and others, WADA decided to follow a piecemeal approach excluding the Court of Arbitration for Sport and athletes' human rights from its recent governance review. This case highlights yet again the ambitious systems of power that puts athletes, especially child athletes, in impossible positions - where medals are often prioritized at the expense of the athletes' physical and mental health. A 15-year old athlete should be protected from misuse of power, whether from their entourage, national federation or state officials. The IOC should use its leverage over WADA to ensure necessary reforms so that athletes' human rights are put at the center of WADA's systems.

As mentioned above, the Sport & Rights Alliance has noted the advances for human rights achieved during your term as IOC president. However, the events and realities at the 2022 Beijing Winter Games have confirmed that the IOC's commitment has seriously regressed. The IOC still lacks a human rights strategy - the most basic requirement for any sport governing body or business claiming to respect human rights.

Given the human rights catastrophe that was the Beijing Games, the IOC cannot simply return to business as usual. In addition to assessing and monitoring the adverse human rights impacts caused or contributed to by the Beijing Winter Games, the IOC is responsible for providing for or cooperating in remedy processes to investigate and ensure access to compensation and redress.

The Sport & Rights Alliance hopes you will view our meeting request with due urgency as serious change is needed if the IOC wishes to avoid cementing a legacy of disregard and neglect of basic rights.

We would welcome a response with a proposed date for the meeting, along with any other information you would like to provide by March 11, 2022.

Committee to Protect Journalists

Football Supporters Europe

International Trade Union Confederation

Transparency International Germany

World Players Association, UNI Global Union

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beijing: Letter to IOC President Requests Urgent Human Rights Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Given the human rights catastrophe that was the Beijing Games, the IOC cannot simply return to business as usual. Read the full letter to IOC President Thomas Bach below: Dr. Thomas Bach, President, International Olympic Committee The unfortunate circumstances of Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva's doping case are representative of the wider governance failures by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the IOC.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Centre Statement on Russian Invasion of Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We’ve all seen the harrowing reports coming from Ukraine in recent days and strongly condemn the military actions carried out by the Russian government. At the Centre for Sport and Human Rights, we’re saddened by the failure to find a diplomatic solution, and recognise that this is now a global cris…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The International Olympic Committee has recommended that Russian and Belarusian athletes be prevented from competing in international events, paving the way for a complete ban on Russian involvement in global sport.

The news came as further countries - including Wales and Scotland - said they would not compete against Russia in football internationals, and Uefa and Fifa were expected to take further action by the close of the day.

In a lengthy declaration on Monday afternoon, which is expected to set in place a domino effect among other sporting organisations, the IOC said it was acting with "a heavy heart" as it called for a ban on both Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials.

"In order to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants," the statement said, "the IOC executive board recommends that international sports federations and sports event organisers not invite or allow the participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials in international competitions."

The IOC did, however, leave some leeway in its statement. It suggested that organisers of tournaments taking place imminently could take different decisions. This included the neutralised approach adopted by Fifa on Sunday with regards to Russia's World Cup play-offs, although reports on Monday afternoon suggested that position could yet be about to change.

"Wherever this is not possible on short notice for organisational or legal reasons, the IOC EB strongly urges international sports federations and organisers of sports events worldwide to do everything in their power to ensure that ... Russian or Belarusian nationals, be it as individuals or teams, should be accepted only as neutral athletes or neutral teams. No national symbols, colours, flags or anthems should be displayed."

The IOC said it had adopted this condition specifically with the upcoming Winter Paralympics in mind, with the Games starting in Beijing on Friday. In a further measure the IOC said it would remove the honour of the Olympic Order from Vladimir Putin. The Olympic Order is the highest award granted by the Olympic movement and Putin was the recipient of a gold honour in 2001.

The IOC statement came on a day when the Ukrainian automotive association urged the FIA to ban all Russian drivers and teams from competing under its banner, including the F1 driver Nikita Mazepin. As Russia's Daniil Medvedev took over the mantle of the men's world No 1 tennis player from Novak Djokovic, his achievement was overshadowed by calls from the Ukrainian Tennis Federation for Russian and Belarusian players not to play in grand slams or ITF tournaments.

In a letter seen by Reuters, the Ukrainian federation described the actions of Russia and Belarus in Ukraine over the past four days as "unprecedented, cynical and bloody".

"Civilians are dying, including women and children; civilian infrastructure is collapsing ... This is a full-scale war that will push our country back decades," the letter said, adding that the goal of Russia's invasion was "extermination."

"Russia and Belarus do not have the right not only to hold international competitions on their territory, but also to participate in all ITF team and individual tournaments abroad," the letter continued.

The Ukrainian Tennis Federation board member Seva Kevlych, talking to Reuters from Kharkiv on Monday, said Medvedev and other Russian players should be barred from grand slam tournaments and the Russian Tennis Federation barred from the Davis Cup and Billie Jean Cup team events, of which they are the reigning champions.

"Let [Medvedev] play on the ATP Tour but grand slams are ITF events and if you lose the possibility to play in grand slams he could never be world No 1," Kevlych said. "He shouldn't play in the French Open, US Open and Wimbledon.

"I don't care that Russia is the holder of the Davis Cup and Billie Jean King Cup. It would shame them when the holders are kicked out of these events."

The ITF said it had taken "swift action" to cancel all events in Russia indefinitely and that no ITF events would be held in Belarus for 2022.

Medvedev took to Twitter on Sunday with a plea for peace, although he did not comment on the current situation. "Today I want to speak on behalf of every kid in the world," he said. "They all have dreams, their lives are just starting, so many nice experiences to come ...

"That's why I want to ask for peace in the world, for peace between countries. Kids are born with inner trust in the world, they believe so much in everything, in people, in love, in safety, in justice, in their chances in life. Let's be together and show them that's it true, because every kid shouldn't stop dreaming."

The 2021 French Open women's singles runner-up, Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, called for an end to violence and war in a social media post on Monday. "Personal ambitions or political motives cannot justify violence," the Russian player said. "This takes away the future not only from us, but also from our children. Stop the violence, stop the war."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IOC calls for international event ban for athletes from Russia and Belarus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The International Olympic Committee has recommended that Russian and Belarusian athletes be prevented from competing in international events, paving the way for a complete ban on Russian involvement in global sport. The news came as further countries - including Wales and Scotland - said they would not compete against Russia in football internationals, and Uefa and Fifa were expected to take further action by the close of the day.