A Love Affair With Dictators

The Olympic Games, the FIFA World Cup and other mega sporting events are some of the world’s great unifying moments. They bring people together in an international celebration of outstanding performance, intercultural spirit, peace, and human solidarity. Children and adults alike look forward to these events and the many benefits they have to offer.

Most major sports governing bodies boast about the formal ethical constituencies that they have given themselves. But in many cases these exemplary objectives remain empty phrases.

However, these benefits are not universally shared. Corruption, greed, political tactics, and human rights violations are casting clouds over recent and future mega sporting events. They may directly and indirectly affect human and children’s rights, or aggravate those already existing in the country. Of course it is undeniable that mega sporting events provide many social opportunities and reasons for public pride. But on the other hand it is equally undeniable that they are not positive for everyone. Most major sports governing bodies boast about the formal ethical constituencies that they have given themselves. But in many cases these exemplary objectives remain empty phrases.

The Olympic Charter proclaims: ‘The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity’. However, forced evictions and increased policing are illustrations of the consequences of mega sporting events for the local population, which contradict these fundamental principles of the Olympic movement.

The FIFA Statutes 2015 contain similar inconsistencies between theory and reality. The FIFA General Provisions foresee, for instance, an article on non-discrimination ‘of any kind against a country, private person or group of people on account of race, skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion’.

With regard tothe FIFA Statutes and the publicly displayed homophobia linked to the Winter Olympics in Sochi 2014, how is it possible that the next FIFA World Cup will again take place in Russia? And what about the FIFA World Cup 2022 in Qatar? This future Arab host country also criminalises homosexuality.

Democracy as an obstacle for sporting events?

What is the value of charters, statutes and principles, if they are not or insufficiently respected and implemented? Looking ahead at the next locations to host mega sporting events, it is clear that there is a trend towards autocratically ruled countries.

This tendency has also been noted by the Danish magazine Sport Executive, coining the title ‘When sport falls in love with dictatorship’. This tendency seems so obvious that even Jérôme Valcke, former FIFA Secretary General, publicly stated in April 2013 that democracy can be inhibiting for a World Cup: ‘When you have a very strong head of state who can decide, as maybe Putin can do in 2018... that is easier for us organisers than a country such as Germany, where you have to negotiate at different levels’. Indeed, recent examples from Switzerland, Norway, and Germany confirm that a functioning civil society and democratic structures with potential for referendums are in fact a hindrance to being awarded such events.

Ongoing reports focusing on the negative effects of mega sporting events on workers and the local population, along with referendums that have decided against hosting the Olympic Games, have resulted in a paradigm shift from within the system.

In terms of constituencies, a milestone was set in the course of the extraordinary FIFA Congress in February 2016. In the shadow of the presidential election, ‘human rights’ entered the FIFA Statutes. Up to this point, FIFA officials had always rejected any links between human rights violations and their major tournaments. Their strategy was mainly to draw the attention to their ‘sport for development’ projects run by the FIFA CSR department to make up for the negative effects of mega sporting events on local populations.

The amended FIFA Statutes now foresee that ‘FIFA is committed to respecting all internationally recognised human rights and shall strive to promote the protection of these rights.’ This paragraph is a first step, but FIFA and its new president will have to walk the talk.

Who bears the responsibility?

Mega sporting events are driven by various stakeholders and staged in a very complex environment. It is not only sports governing bodies such as FIFA and the IOC that are involved, but also public authorities, organising committees, and sponsors. The complexity is also nurtured by the variety of affected sectors representing civil society which involve human rights, labour, housing, LGBT, anticorruption, and so on. The responsibility for ensuring that local populations are protected from the risks created by mega sporting events delivery processes does not fall solely to the sports governing body that owns them.

National and local governments, organising entities and sponsors are all protagonists within the hosting process and therefore also obliged to ensure human rights are upheld in every domain, including delivery, event-related labour practices, infrastructure development, security, etc.

There is also a stakeholder responsibility to ensure that positive effects and opportunities are created by and for the local population, especially children, throughout the life-cycle of the event.

These stakeholders also have to recognise the vulnerabilities of different social groups. And these vulnerabilities exist throughout all phases of the event life-cycle, from the bid phase to the ‘legacy’ period. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights state that business enterprises have the responsibility to respect human rights, wherever they operate, independent of a state’s ability or willingness to fulfil its own human rights obligations, even though it does not diminish those obligations.

All stakeholders involved in bidding for and hosting mega sporting events must acknowledge and meet their responsibilities to minimise risks and stop any human rights violations related to such an event.

But with a ‘just do no harm’ approach, the potential in, through and around sport and mega sporting events is not tapped. There is also a stakeholder responsibility to ensure that positive effects and opportunities are created by and for the local population, especially children, throughout the life-cycle of the event. However, such positive changes will not happen by coincidence. They need thoughtful planning, explicit commitment and strong leadership from the very top; especially by the event owners. But any effect will only be promising and sustainable if the local population is consulted and actively involved from beginning to end.

A host community that suffers in the name of sport must be avoided at all costs.

Human rights must be a core requirement of the entire bid and hosting process, and overseen by an effective framework for implementation that includes access to remedy, human rights due diligence and risk assessment. Event owners must also recognise that not all host countries or cities will have equal capacity to achieve the expected human rights standards. In such cases, decisions must be taken carefully and support given to improve local capacities. A host community that suffers in the name of sport must be avoided at all costs.

Instead of assuming responsibility, senior officials of sports governing bodies still keep repeating in public that they are ‘not the United Nations’. Their rhetoric concentrates on the fine line between the indirect and direct influence of mega sporting events, often hiding behind legal formalities.

Should it not be a core interest of any serious sport entity and its values that nobody’s rights are violated as a result of mega sporting events? A global sports tournament can only be truly successful if it does not harm the local population. Although host states bear the main responsibility for human rights abuses that occur in their countries, sports governing bodies also have a responsibility to respect and use all their influence in assuring human rights and the true values of sport.

The need to both mitigate negative effects and maximise the positive opportunities before, during and after mega sporting events has been identified. For this purpose, a strong interdisciplinary alignment and coordination of research evidence is needed, together with a cross-sectoral approach.

The case of Brazil

In terms of academic work, Celia Brackenridge’s report on 'Child Exploitation and the FIFA World Cup: A Review of Risks and Protective Interventions' (Brunel University, London, 2013) was a milestone. Due to the fact that Brazil was assigned to host the two most prestigious mega sporting events within two years – 2014 and 2016 – there is a growing body of research available for this country.

Related to the 2014 FIFA World Cup, research was conducted by the Dundee University which identified four key violations to children’s rights in Brazil related to hosting mega sporting events. These violations were police and army violence, displacement, sexual exploitation, and child labour. This research also highlighted an increased vulnerability of specific children regarding rights violations. This most vulnerable group consisted of children in street situations and residents of favelas. The available evidence also draws attention to the fact that children do not live in isolation and are also vulnerable to the rights violations experienced by their families and communities.

In preparation for the 2016 Olympics, the community of Vila Autódromo is facing extreme pressure from Rio’s City Hall. The residents were asked to leave their homes to make way for Olympic infrastructure, often going without electricity and facing difficult living conditions. The formerly thriving community with shops, a community association and attractive streets, now resembles a war zone.

For those families who remain, life is a constant battle to anticipate the next move by the authorities. The residents have to show a pass to access their own houses through the main Olympic Park site. And they are only allowed to receive visitors to their homes with an authorisation. The 2014 FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games have both greatly aggravated the level of police and army violence in Rio de Janeiro. Violence against homeless children and adolescents, during protests and evictions, and in favelas – particularly by the UPPs (Brazil's Military Police Force) – has been reported.

Critical questions and investigations regarding mega sporting events and human rights are not welcomed in Russia, Qatar or Beijing.

These ‘security measures’, especially in the so-called ‘pacification operations’ have caused many casualties and human rights violations. Many children and adolescents have shown signs of psychological and emotional damage due to these traumatic experiences. Despite the growing number of substantial evaluations and studies linked to mega sporting events and human rights, there is still a lack of long-term research.

Moreover, the trend of staging future mega sporting events in autocratically ruled countries also increases risks for researchers and investigative journalists in terms of safety and security. Critical questions and investigations regarding mega sporting events and human rights are not welcomed in Russia, Qatar or Beijing.

A human rights framework

With regard to the complexity of mega sporting events, a broader human rights framework is needed to advocate for labour rights, LGBT rights, children’s rights, environmental and anti-corruption requirements.

Besides this cross-sectoral approach, strong coalitions are necessary if they are to be heard within major sports governing bodies. For this purpose, a united effort has been made to form the Sport and Rights Alliance (SRA), a coalition of leading NGOs and trade unions engaged in addressing the decision-makers of international sports governing bodies.

Real change is based on a dialogue on values and evidence around needed reforms on the bidding process for future mega sporting events. Next to alliances and pressure exerted by civil society, the aforementioned UN Principles of Human Rights and Business provide solid guidelines for concrete measures at a policy level.

Currently, civil society networks are asking the major sports governing bodies to issue a public human rights commitment and policy; to put in place a human rights capacity; to ensure access to remedy; to undertake human rights due diligence; to conduct monitoring of all stages of the mega sporting events; and to enable external independent monitoring.

Real change is based on a dialogue on values and evidence around needed reforms on the bidding process for future mega sporting events.

Within the framework of the UEFA EURO 2008 in Austria and Switzerland, the UEFA officials described their strategy to the host cities as: ‘You bring the house, and we bring the party.’

But in a respectful and decent society, people help to clean the house and share costs after a common event. The house owner will be taking the main decisions. That is why consultation with and the participation of civil society and local groups are necessary at every phase in the event’s life-cycle.

Ethical principles are set out in the Olympic Charter and the FIFA Statutes. But a lot of work still needs to be done in terms of implementation, since these key principles are non-negotiable. The complex challenges of mega sporting events require reliable cooperation between all stakeholders and a sustainable approach for the sake of humankind.