Olympics: Presidential Candidates Need to Step Up on Rights

Lack of Priority for IOC Human Rights Policies Poses Risk to Athletes, Fans, Workers

(Amsterdam, February 26, 2025) – Candidates for the presidency of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) failed to adequately address human rights and good governance in documents outlining their proposed programs, in advance of March elections, the Sport & Rights Alliance said today.

“The International Olympic Committee affects the lives of millions of athletes, workers, fans, journalists and communities worldwide,” said Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch. “It is essential for candidates who want to oversee global sport to make clear that they will uphold the IOC’s human rights framework, commitments and responsibilities, and commit to meeting with stakeholders and operating with transparency and good governance.”

The next eight years will bring a wave of challenges for the IOC, including selecting the host for the 2036 Olympic and Paralympic Games and delivering the 2028 Games in the United States, where international human rights are currently under threat, it is paramount for the next president to not only uphold but champion human rights and good governance throughout their term. IOC members who will vote for the next president should consider candidates’ commitments and track records on human rights and transparency as they cast their vote.

“In times when the principles of the rule of law are under pressure globally, the standard of good governance in sports becomes a key to supporting transparency, accountability and respect for human rights,” said Tor Dølvik, special adviser at Transparency International Norway. “This is critical because the Olympic movement has an enormous impact on the world even beyond sports, especially on young people.”

The election, at the 144th IOC Session on March 19-21 in Greece, is the first since the IOC added amendments recognizing its responsibility to uphold “respect for internationally recognized human rights” to the Olympic Charter. The IOC also adopted its Strategic Framework on Human Rights in 2022, which sets out four-year objectives and actions to ensure the IOC respects human rights as an organization, as owner of the Olympic Games, and as leader of the Olympic Movement.

“Given that this is the first time a new president will be elected under the new Olympic Charter, it is deeply troubling that so few of the candidates have even mentioned human rights in their election campaigns,” said Steve Cockburn, head of labor rights and sport at Amnesty International. “At a time when rights are under sustained attack, we deserve to know whether the next IOC President will be ready and willing to put freedom, equality, and dignity at the heart of world sport.”

The Sport & Rights Alliance analyzed the formal written proposed programs submitted by the seven candidates, as required by the IOC. The alliance also wrote to each of the candidates, though only received responses from HRH Prince Feisal Al Hussein of Jordan, Lord Sebastian Coe, and Morinari Watanabe. As stakeholder engagement is foundational to the ability of any organization—and any leader—to uphold their human rights responsibilities, it is concerning that only these three candidates took the time to respond, the alliance said.

David Lappartient was the only candidate to address human rights in any depth throughout his program, highlighting the need to “leverage our influence to promote compliance with human and labour rights.” The programs of Johan Eliasch, Hussein, and Coe did mention human rights, but only in relation to ensuring access to play sport. In written responses to the Sport & Rights Alliance, however:

Hussein said that he plans to strengthen the IOC’s efforts through updating the Strategic Framework as part of Olympic Agenda 2036 and proposed to meet with the Alliance whether he is elected or not.
Coe cited the human rights initiatives of World Athletics, saying that these were introduced under his presidency and should generate confidence toward his commitments.
Watanabe responded to each of the Alliance’s questions on human rights issues, presenting ideas to mitigate human rights and governance issues ranging from hosting the Games in multiple separate countries to bringing in third-party monitoring.

“There is no doubt that the right to participate in sport is incredibly important, but it is also just the beginning of advancing human rights in and through sport,” said Ginous Alford, director of sport and human rights at World Players Association. “Human rights should not be seen as constraints on the IOC, but rather as cardinal values to help navigate the organization through the many geopolitical, social and economic challenges ahead.”

The IOC has long neglected to recognize athletes’ rights as workers to organize and collectively bargain, which would allow athletes an equal say on all matters affecting their careers, wellbeing, and livelihoods.While Coe, Hussein, Lappartient, and Eliasch mentioned athletes’ voice and participation in policymaking in their programs, none mentioned union representation or collective bargaining.

“World Players’ recent public polling shows broad support for the IOC to change its business model and governance to include athlete voices and pay them fairly for their work,” said Matthew Graham, head of UNI World Players. “If the IOC is to keep up with the demands and expectations of all stakeholders in the modern professional sport era, the next president must prioritize embedding the fundamental rights of athletes—not forgetting that this includes labor rights—and recognizing athletes’ hard work and dedication.”

Several proposals addressed the need to protect athletes’ wellbeing, but only two provided specific strategies. Watanabe focused on improving the IOC’s Integrity and Compliance Hotline, and Hussein made several proposals including integrating “safe sport” into all International Federations and National Olympic Committees and ensuring safeguarding training is available in multiple languages.

“The next IOC president must realize that true and effective safeguarding is not possible without athlete voices,” said Andrea Florence, director of the Sport & Rights Alliance. “Current ‘safe sport’ approaches continue to lack consultation, support and confidentiality with and for affected people. This needs to change.”

None of the candidates addressed lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) rights, though Lappartient did discuss the participation of transgender athletes in his section on inclusion and diversity, emphasizing the need to balance “respect for human rights” with “fair competition” and to make decisions “grounded on solid scientific evidence.” In contrast, the proposals by Juan Antonio Samaranch, Eliasch, and Coe call for “safeguarding” women’s categories in terms that are at odds with the recommendations of the IOC Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination.

“At a time when the rights of LGBTI people—and especially athletes—are under attack around the world, these positions from the IOC presidential candidates are extremely concerning,” said Gurchaten Sandhu, director of programs at ILGA World. “The IOC has done incredible work over the last few years to consult with athletes, understand the research, and set clear, rights-based guidelines by adopting the IOC Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination. Electing any president who plans to discard these important achievements would have a tremendous negative impact on the lives and safety of trans, intersex, and gender-diverse athletes at all levels, including youth.”

Regarding workers’ rights, Lappartient praised the social charter negotiated between businesses and workers at Paris 2024 and expressed the desire to replicate it at future Olympic Games, but none of the other candidates mentioned labor rights or any concerns for workers, including migrant workers, who will help deliver many future Olympic Games.

The candidates also neglected press freedom and safety for journalists though Kirsty Coventry cited a need to improve communication, access and openness to scrutiny. Watanabe proposed splitting Olympics hosts between five continents and to “obtain a commitment [to prevent labor exploitation] from the government” of cities bidding for the Games.

But none of the candidates said that the IOC should assess potential host cities’ commitment to human rights in the selection processes. This longstanding failure to do proper human rights due diligence in advance of awarding events has been a source of serious human rights violations in the past.