[ad_1]
The United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee will not sanction athletes for raising their fists or kneeling during the national anthem during the Olympic trials, providing for a controversial policy it expects to adhere to when many of those same athletes will travel to Tokyo this summer.
The USOPC on Tuesday released a nine-page document to offer advice on the kind of “racial and social protests” that will and will not be permitted by the hundreds who will compete in the coming months for places on the U.S. team. . The document comes three months after the federation, responding to appeals from its athletes, decided it would not enforce long-standing rules banning events at the Olympics.
The International Olympic Committee’s Rule 50 is a constant source of friction around the world. Many American athletes have called for more freedom by using their platform at the Olympics to advance social justice causes. But others, both inside and outside the United States, balk at widespread rule changes that they fear will lead to protests that sully their own Olympic experiences.
The broad debate has its most visible roots in the ousting of American sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos from the 1968 Games. Their raised fists at the medals stand in Mexico City led to the founding snapshot of social protest in the history of sport.
With advice from its newly formed Racial and Social Justice Council, the USOPC released a dos and don’ts list as part of its document. The list of permitted forms of demonstration included raising fists, kneeling during the hymn, and wearing hats or masks with phrases such as “Black Lives Matter” or words such as “equality” or “justice”.
Hate symbols, as defined by the Anti-Defamation League, and actions that would prevent others from competing, such as lying in the middle of the track, are not allowed.
The document attempts to define as much as possible, including clarifying that acceptable protests should involve “the advancement of racial and social justice; or the promotion of the human dignity of individuals or groups who have been historically under-represented, minority or marginalized in their respective societies. the context.”
It defines a process by which cases which fall outside the rules can be decided. It also clarifies that while the USOPC will not sanction athletes for many actions, it cannot “prevent … third parties from making statements or taking action on their own, and which each participant must take. his own decision regarding the risks and rewards. this may be involved. “
These third parties could include the IOC itself. The body that runs the Olympics is conducting its own review, led by an Athletes’ Commission, which could lead to changes to Rule 50. It is not expected to go that far than what the USOPC does. This review is expected to be completed next month, and the USOPC may adjust its guidelines if necessary.
But the USOPC’s initial decision – announced in December – that it would not punish athletes who break Rule 50 in Tokyo has drawn a line in the sand that paves the way for possible conflict. In many circumstances in the past, a nation’s Olympic committee was supposed to impose sanctions on athletes on its team who break the rules at the Olympics. The USOPC has made it clear that it will not do so in many cases that fall under Rule 50.
“I am confident that you will make the best decision for yourself, your sport and your fellow competitors,” wrote Sarah Hirshland, USOPC CEO, in a letter to athletes responding to the new directions.
[ad_2]
Source link