17 February 2022
Neutrality of the Olympic Movement and Freedom of Expression
The relationship between sports and neutrality belongs to the most hotly debated topics in international sports law. This blog post illustrates the application of the neutrality principle in practice and argues that the athletes’ freedom of expression in sports is emerging as a ‘concession’ rather than as a ‘right’, suggesting that a reform of the regulations imposed by the Olympic Movement is urgently needed. Continue reading >>
0 
10 February 2022
Athletes and the Human Right to Freedom of Expression
While Sport Governing Bodies can regulate freedom of expression for athletes in sports, the current approach of the IOC seems to fail to abide by the standards required under international human rights law. In particular, the lack of clarity on the content and forms of expression banned under Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter seems to conflict with the foreseeability expected by international human rights law. Continue reading >>
0
08 February 2022
The Re-Emergence of the Athlete Activist
Expressions in support of social justice, inclusion, anti-discrimination and LGBTQI+ rights no longer appear to breach Rule 50. Where Rule 50 could still come into play is where athlete activists seek to demonstrate their support for overtly political causes. The guidance states unequivocally that expressions must not be targeted at people, organisations, or countries. At Beijing 2022, any expression/gesture aimed at an individual politician, the Communist Party of China, or the Chinese state will remain a breach of Rule 50. Continue reading >>
0
07 February 2022
Keeping Politics Out
Throughout history, the IOC always faced tough choices when it dealt with freedom of speech. It attempted to act within the framework of international human rights law whilst it continuously promoted the autonomy of sport from all political interests. At this point, it does not seem that the IOC will move away from its general, apolitical stance. Continue reading >>
0
10 June 2016
The Pechstein case: Transnational constitutionalism in inaction at the Bundesgerichtshof
How independent is the Court of Arbitration for Sport, or the international sport governing bodies (SGB) in general? This question was at the heart of the Pechstein case before the German Federal Court (BGH). The BGH considers that the CAS is a true arbitral tribunal in the sense of German civil procedural law and that it is not structurally imbalanced in favour of the SGBs. In this blog post, I will aim at critically unpacking and deconstructing the four arguments the decision is based on, one by one. Continue reading >>07 June 2016
Der BGH und Pechstein: Transnationaler Konstitutionalismus sieht anders aus
Der Fall Pechstein hätte dem BGH die Möglichkeit eröffnet, die ungleichen Machtstrukturen im professionellen Sport einer effektiven und unabhängigen Kontrolle zu unterziehen und die weitreichende Macht der Sportverbände zu begrenzen. Diese Möglichkeit ließ der BGH ungenutzt verstreichen. Frau Pechstein hat bereits angekündigt, sich an das Bundesverfassungsgericht wenden zu wollen. Es steht zu erwarten, dass die verfassungsrechtliche Komponente ihres Falles dort deutlicher zur Geltung kommen wird. Continue reading >>
0
10 March 2016