Speaking Out on Chinese Human Rights Violations?

The IOC charter section 51.3 states, “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”

IOC President Jacques Rogge has reiterated this point, as has the Chinese deputy communications director of the Beijing Olympic Organizing Commmittee, Sun Weide saying, “The Olympic games are a celebration of sport, not a political convention. We are strongly opposed to any attempt to politicize the Beijing Games.” National Olympic Committees around the world have come under some scrutiny from human rights groups for advising their athletes not to respond to questions about Chinese human rights violations or the current situation in the Sudan or Tibet. Some NOCs, specifically, Great Britain, New Zealand and Belgium have stipulated that fact in contracts signed by their athletes. However, the United States, Canada and Australia have not taken steps to ensure the silence of their athletes.

According to the IOC website, the second fundamental principle of Olympism found in the Olympic charter states that, “The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.”

This fundamental Olympic principle takes on new relevance as China’s human rights issues attract global attention and increased awareness. These games are not only about the athletes and the spirit of international competition. They can also be used to bring nations and cultures into an open dialogue in order to effect change in the world.

Olympic athletes find themselves in the unique position of being on a world stage with the ability to publicize and convey an issue to hundreds of millions of spectators and viewers across the globe.

USOC spokesman Darryl Seibel stated, “No U.S. athlete would be reprimanded or censured for expressing a critical opinion about China’s human rights record, either before or during the Olympics, so long as it is done in an appropriate setting. “We will not prohibit free speech,” Seibel said, “but in speaking with our athletes, most seem to feel it would be highly inappropriate to use the Games as a forum to make a political statement.” The code of conduct that 2008 U.S. Olympians will sign asks them only to respect the terms of the Olympic Charter.” The Chinese organizers have stipulated that no one is to make any kind of statement either with words or apparel in any Olympic sporting venue or the Olympic village.

This statement appears to be in direct contrast with the true Olympic spirit. The Olympic Charter contains a section that states the mission and role of the IOC. The first role of the IOC is, “to encourage and support the promotion of ethics in sport as well as education of youth through sport and to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that, in sport, the spirit of fair play prevails and violence is banned.”

The fourth role of the IOC is, “to cooperate with the competent public or private organizations and authorities in the endeavor to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace.”

It is important to keep these roles in mind when discussing how the Olympics can be used to impact the global community. By shedding light on China’s poor human rights record it may be possible to bring about change, but none of that can happen if the Chinese Olympic Committee and Chinese government place restrictions on the statements and actions of participating athletes.

There are some American athletes who feel that the Beijing Olympics can serve as a forum in which to make a political statement or at least increase global awareness concerning China’s human rights record. The occupation of Tibet as well as the crisis in Darfur, which China has supported and financed by purchasing oil from Sudan and in return supplying the region with arms, has attracted much international attention and Dr. Jill Savitt, Director of Dream for Darfur has been quoted in the L.A. Times as saying, “The only thing I would really hope for from athletes is that they’re open-minded about this and understand that’s it’s legitimate to utilize the games to promote peace and international cooperation.”

John Amaechi Amnesty International’s sporting ambassador will visit the Beijing games and he has encouraged athletes to become aware of human rights violations. "I would encourage athletes not to distract themselves by burying themselves in the nuance and facts and figures and legislation of China, but simply to acknowledge that being an ambassador for human rights in China is the most Olympian thing to do. Anything less than that is not being a true Olympian, no matter the colour of the medal that you hold up.”

These games are certainly about athletic competition between nations, but the Olympics cannot be depoliticized so easily. Beijing 2008 provides a great opportunity for the nations of the world to urge China to change its policies with regard to human rights and suffering. Many National Olympic Committees are urging their athletes to restrain themselves from speaking out on political and social issues, however, complacency and apathy only maintain the status quo, not alter it.


How should China and the Olympic Committee deal with outspoken athletes? How should the media cover these potential events? What responsibility do the athletes have to raise awareness about, Darfur, Tibet etc? What is an appropriate form of demonstration? Should National Olympic Committees silence their athletes completely? Should medals be revoked for protesting? Should spectators face jail time or fines for protesting? What is the media’s responsibility in covering the Games? Is the Olympic Charter being misinterpreted?