download - IOA

At the Panamerican Games in 1987, the United States refused to grant an Chilean
athlete a visa, on the grounds that he was guilty of human rights violations.
This leads us to the following question: which of the two obligations deriving
from the Charter has priority: that which obliges members of the Olympic family
to promote and protect human rights or that which accepts that an athlete cannot
be excluded for political reasons? Such a question would justify having a whole
Session devoted to it!
The third issue that we shall look at today, and which is of particular interest
not just in terms of its legal scope but above all because it reflects an aspect of how
the Olympic Movement has developed - a not very positive one, I must confess -
is the eligibility code.
I have no wish to bore you by starting with a look at the concept of "amateurism"
and the forms of professionalism we find today. There is no doubt that we
are in the presence of a spectacular levelling out of sport, with the appearance of
every form of professionalism in all areas. There mere fact that, in some sports
such as tennis, basketball and volleyball, the concept of amateurism has completely
disappeared, and the Olympic Games are "fortunate" enough to have "dream
teams" competing in different sports is enough to explain the path which the
Olympic Movement is following.
It would, however, be interesting to see how the famous "eligibility code" has
evolved from the end of the 1960s until today, and look at the biggest changes to it.
Until 1971, the first rule of the Olympic Charter stated that: "The aims of the
Olympic Movement are to promote the development of those fine physical and
moral qualities that come from...amateur sport...".
That was the last time that the word amateur appeared in the IOCs Charter.
The content of the rule in its next appearance was unchanged, except that the
word amateur was deleted.
Already, as of that time, the new trend in the economic orientation of athletes
could be seen, leading to a series of modifications aimed at the total independence
of sports para-activity.
What is the "eligibility code"? The older athletes used to say that it was a "chastity
belt"! Only those who wore it were allowed to take part in the Olympic
Games. We shall see how, over the years, this chastity belt has turned into a pair
of lacy underwear!
Let me read you the restrictions imposed by the Olympic Charter until 1971 and
you will understand what I am talking about:
"To be eligible for the Olympic Games, a competitor must always have participated
in sport as an avocation without material gain of any kind. He can avail
himself of this qualification: a) if he has a basic occupation designed to ensure his
present and future livelihood; b) if he does not receive or has never received any
remuneration for participation in sport; c) if he complies with the rules of the International
Federation concerned and the official interpretations of this article."
Such was the first version of rule 26, which came with a series of bye-laws, the
122