Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Amid the broader debate on inequalities in the use of sanctions by states of the “Global North”, this comment examines how the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) addresses the principle of equality in relation to war-related sanctions imposed on Russian sports entities, such as the Football Union of Russia and the Russian Olympic Committee. It considers the argument of unequal treatment, with Russian entities comparing their sanctions to previous conflicts involving countries like Israel, which, they claim, did not face similar consequences in international sports. Although the CAS panels rejected these inequality claims, they recognised that the principle of equality is applicable to sanctions in sports law. The analysis of the corresponding CAS awards highlights three approaches to addressing inequalities in sanctioning: (1) controlling potential discrimination based on nationality, (2) ensuring equal treatment for breaches of Lex Sportiva/Lex Olympica, and (3) considering equal treatment with regard to global reactions to conflicts in relation to broader sanctions. While the first two approaches provide clear criteria for comparison under the equality principle, using global responses to conflicts as a reference is vague and risks exacerbating politicisation in the context of sanctions. The analysis demonstrates that, as a result of the awards, athletes and teams now have a pathway for an assessment of sanctions, enabling, to a certain extent, a review of their consistency in relation to past reactions to comparable conflicts or violations of Lex Olympica. However, international sporting bodies are still required to establish clear criteria for an ex ante assessment, outlining which forms of involvement by athletes, teams, and/or National Olympic Committees in conflict events – as well as which types of conflicts – will trigger sanctions.
Patricia Wiater (Mon,) studied this question.