PAGE 44
A FIST OF FREEDOM OR A FIST OF IRON? RULE 50 AND THE OLYMPIC PARADOX STANIS ELSBORG Stanis Elsborg is an analyst at Play the Game, an initiative run by the Danish Institute for Sports Studies (Idan), aiming at raising the ethical standards of sport and promoting democracy, transparency and freedom of expression in world sport. He holds a Master of Science in Humanities and Social Sport Sciences from the University of Copenhagen specialising in the field of sport, politics and national identity. Stanis tweets @StanisElsborg
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”1. 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 muchdebated Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter2, which states that “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.” The Olympic Charter is a set of governing rules and guidelines of the Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games. 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 any Olympic venues, including the field of
HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER | VOLUME 29: ISSUE 2 – AUGUST 2020
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 and traditional media, or any other platforms. But what do the IOC guidelines mean by “politicisation of sport”? This article takes a historical look at Olympic Games opening ceremonies and disputed athlete actions to show how the IOC’s interpretation of politicisation differs depending on whether the ideas in question are expressed by an athlete or a host nation that pays to arrange the Olympic spectacle. THE SOCHI OLYMPICS: A NEW HISTORY OF RUSSIA “All the world’s a stage” said Shakespeare 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. In recent 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. The 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics serve as a prime example of the connection between sport and politics, and the way nation states use the Olympics as a platform for political messaging. Thomas Bach
