Legal Problems of the Contemporary Olympic Movement

Mestre, Alexandre Miguel

doi:10.1007/978-90-6704-439-4_4

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Right to Privacy and Reputation (Mestre, 2008)  National Security  Hate Speech and Propaganda related to war (Nocita, 2020) Basically, IOC doesn't want any of these things happening in their global event.…”

Section: Justification Of Rule 50 By the Iocmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olympic rule 50

Chanda¹,

Sahoo²,

Sahni³

2021

lingcure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Tokyo Olympics, Raven Saunders, Bao Shanju and Zhong Tianshi were questioned by the IOC and got warnings due to their “performance of political demonstration” at the Olympic podium. We saw something similar during the 2012 London Olympic Summer Games when an indigenous boxer of Australia, Damien Hooper, was nearly disqualified from the Olympic competition for entering the ring wearing the Aboriginal flag shirt of Australia. The Olympics has had a history of maintaining a hypocritical form of political neutrality over the years. The Olympic Charter talks about sport being an essential medium in advancing the human rights of various individuals from different countries. However, it also chooses to stay neutral and gives preference to host nations. “Freedom of opinion and expression”, is a fundamental right enshrined in core international and regional human rights treaties and national laws. But it is also to be taken note that this freedom is restricted due to the “legitimate aims” of these treaties and laws. The Olympic Charter has followed suit and enacted a certain rule that prevents athletes from making demonstrations at the Olympic sites under the threat of disciplinary sanctions.

show abstract

Section: Justification Of Rule 50 By the Iocmentioning

confidence: 99%