Sport is often presented by Sports Governing Bodies
(SGBs), and in particular the International Olympic Committee, as
apolitical. A neutral endeavor, which ignores the whims of politics and
keeps national governments at arm’s length. In short, it is thought of as an
autonomous sphere of transnational society wishing to remain
unaffected by the political turbulences out there. In fact, many SGBs enforce strict rules banning political speech by individuals, and in the spaces, subjected to their contractual power. Moreover, FIFA, for example, regularly issues effective sanctions against states
which are perceived as threatening the autonomy of the governance of
football on their territory. Hence, this apolitical ideal of
international sports is not only a founding myth of the Olympic
Movement, it is actively pursued by SGBs through their private
regulatory powers and has hard consequences for athletes, clubs, sport
officials alike.
Yet, on 24 February, Russia decided to invade Ukraine, in what has
become the most important land war in Europe since the implosion of
ex-Yugoslavia. This invasion was quickly followed by condemnations from
the IOC and many other SGBs, leading in many cases, most prominently by
UEFA and FIFA, to the exclusion of Russian teams and athletes from
international sporting competitions. This reaction is difficult to
square with the neutrality and autonomy of sport so vigorously defended
by the international SGBs until recently. It raises also many questions
of double standards: why did this illegal invasion lead to sporting
consequences and not others? Furthermore, the Court of Arbitration of
Sport recently released two orders (available here and here)
concerning UEFA and FIFA’s decisions to exclude Russian national teams
and clubs from their football competitions, which outline the legal
strategies pursued by the SGBs to reconcile the public urge to exclude
Russia(ns) from international sporting competitions, and their
commitments to political neutrality.
We are very happy to welcome three outstanding scholars to discuss
these issues with us from different methodological perspectives.
Speakers:
- Prof. Carmen Pérez (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid), who wrote a blog on the reactions of SGBs to Russia’s invasion
- Dr. Daniela Heerdt (Asser Institute and Centre for Sports and Human Rights), who is the co-author of a blog mapping the reactions of SGBs to Russia’s invasion
- Carole Gomez
(University of Lausanne and Institut de Relations Internationales et
Strategiques), who has been interviewed numerous times by international media on the
issue (see here and here)
Moderators:
Register for free HERE!
Dear readers,
If you missed it (or wish to re-watch it), the video of our third Zoom In webinar from 25 February on the CAS award in the World Anti-Doping Agency v. Russian Anti-Doping Agency case is available on the YouTube channel of the Asser Institute:
Stay tuned and watch this space, the announcement for the next Zoom In webinar, which will take place on 31 March, is coming soon!