 Welcome to the sports playbook where we discuss solutions to issues that impact sports. I am your host, Angela Hazelett. We are here to discuss the Russian invasion and the Olympics. Today we have two guests. We have with us today Catherine Noor, an attorney and sports risk management expert from Hawaii. Welcome Catherine. And we also have with us Ricardo Gens, an attorney who has previously practiced sports law in Spain and currently resides in Miami, Florida. Welcome, Ricardo. Hello and good afternoon. Good morning, Catherine. Ricardo, your mother worked in administrative capacity for the Munich Olympics in 1972. These were the Olympic games at which a group of Palestinian terrorists stormed the Olympic village, took hostage and killed Israeli athletes. Since then, the International Olympic Committee or IOC, as we'll refer to that today, has renewed its ancient Greek tradition of calling upon all nations to observe an Olympic truce, which has been consistently in effect since the 1994 winter games. The Olympic truce calls for countries to maintain peace from seven days before the opening ceremony through seven days after the closing ceremony of each Olympic games. This truce is intended to protect the interests of sport through athletes. Safe travel to and from the games and to promote peace and reconciliation by bringing the world together. Fast forward to 2022. Russia was one of 173 countries to co-sponsor the United Nations Resolution to encourage member states to uphold the Olympic truce. Yet only four days after the conclusion of the Olympic winter games in Beijing and before the Winter Paralympics began, the Russian army invaded Ukraine in violation of the Olympic truce. Russia has breached Olympic truces previously as in 2008, when troops from Russia and Georgia clashed in disputed territory south of Asitia on the day of the Beijing 2008 opening ceremony. While in 2014, Russia invaded and annexed the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine during a military operation and overlapped with the Sochi 2014 Olympic and Paralympics. For these past incidents, Russia has never admitted to violating the Olympic truce, but instead is referred to its action as mere domestic disputes that are not in the purview of the United Nations. Now, Ricardo, clearly, peace has not always prevailed at the time surrounding the Olympic games. Is the Olympic truce then actually effective? Thank you for the nice friendly question. I'll see that you're not in the ceasefire atmosphere, so I'll fire back at you, saying the Olympic movement as such, as we know it nowadays, I feel that it has to undergo a severe process of insight as to actually understand where society stands nowadays. If we think about how the 90s and before society was structured, it was very hierarchical. Nowadays, we're talking about horizontal societies, incorporations in general in society. So with this said, I think that it's more the athletes themselves forcing their national Olympic committees to understand and to speak the voice of the athletes, rather let the politicians do the speaking for the athletes, who do not represent them. So with this, I believe that in general, we should evaluate the true meaning of this truce and who has to be subject to it, either the athletes or the nations, because in general, we're considering that the athletes, are they subject to whom? They, before they get to the Olympic games, they've been competing for days and years and they know the athletes from other nations with whom they've possibly even trained and for sure they've competed in other competitions prior to reaching the Olympic games and their best interest is always to compete, leaving politics aside. So my question to you is, why are we still talking about politics in sports and not solely about sports? What other international competition do we see where sports are mingled with politics? I think there's a lot of sports that are intermingled with politics. I don't know that you can solely separate them and there's a lot of intersection and interplay between politics and sports. And in fact, athletes often use the sports as a platform for their political movements as well. Catherine, what are your thoughts on this Olympic truce concept? And I think Ricardo is suggesting that maybe the countries should be, this truce is maybe not intended for these countries but really for the athletes at play. I don't know, did he, I think, Ricardo, that you said the opposite of that. I think you were saying that the truce for the countries and not for the athletes. Did I get that wrong? I think what you mentioned is correct. Yeah, that the countries have to reconsider their position because the athletes are the ones who are ultimately the ones who want to compete and the ones who want to joyfully and peacefully represent their nation, leaving aside all other issues because they themselves, when they're down there on the field, be it the athletic field for the summer Olympics or out in the snow in the winter Olympics, they know these other athletes from decades or possibly in some cases, some of them might have been even their fans as we know in speed skating. So in many cases, we're missing the voice of the athletes as it has been in many occasions and for the last 20 to 30 years where the athletes' voices are being heard more and more. In a way, Angela, what you're saying, athletes' voices are pushing politicians to react, not the other way around. And that's the issue here. Athletes are being used as, I don't want to say scapegoats, but as pions to create a certain reaction. Yet, for example, the female US soccer team, very smart, demanded equal pay, which in other sports, for example, in tennis, which has been implemented many, many years before that. So that proves how certain structures or certain beliefs in sports have to be modernized. And that's why I love the fact that Thomas Bach is the president of the IOC. He himself is a former athlete. He himself competed in the Olympics. So he understands the athlete's perspective. And that's why I find it what he's doing slowly, but surely is important to keep the games above all other issues that happened surrounding the games. See, for example, what happened this weekend in Saudi Arabia with the Formula One competition, where on Saturday there were some missiles and the athletes, the pilots and their teams questioned if it was correct to compete the next day or not. So that's, I think, I hope that clarifies a bit the point, Angela. Karen? Catherine? Well, let's look at the Olympic Charter, okay? And the portion that concerns the athlete. The Olympic Charter says that the practices sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play. What's interesting to me is that it says the possibility of practicing the sport. So it doesn't say that they have an absolute right to do it. And had it said that they had an absolute right, then I'm not sure that the IOC could block certain athletes from participating for any reason. They're saying that they should have the possibility. I mean, clearly the invasion of Ukraine during the truce was a violation. At least in my opinion, it was a violation of the Olympic truce. And so essentially there was that risk during the Olympics games and then a few days after the invasion occurred. And then thereafter, the Paralympics began and the issue was whether the Russian athletes could participate. At first the IOC said they could, but then after pushback and concern, then it was decided that they would not be able to proceed with competing. And I actually think they got it right. I don't think that they should have in light of the fact that there is a violation of the Olympic truce and that there's a risk to athletes. And because it does distract from the Olympic charter, the Olympism, the Olympic movement, I think that that was the right move. Well, I think that's really interesting. The violation of the Olympic truce, the response had to come from the International Paralympic Committee because the International Olympic Committee and the International Paralympic Committee are separate entities. So all the IOC could do at that point was really encourage other entities, other organizations to ban participation of Russian athletes from future competition. And so the IOC basically made that encouragement. They suggested that all sports and events that are planned to be held in Russia or Belarus should be relocated and encouraging the prohibition of displaying any of those countries' national symbols. So that is something interesting that IOC wasn't able to take the stance, but the Olympic truce is actually non-binding, meaning it's encouraged, it's recommended, it's an ideology, but it's not something where there's actual sanctions or clarified sanctions in place. So, Ricardo, what do you think the, should the IOC take a stronger stance moving forward against Russia? I mean, this is at least the third time that they have allegedly violated this Olympic truce. So should they do something more even though it's a non-binding ideal? Let me rephrase the question. What other acts of discrimination have we seen in the Olympics? When we talk about there's no differentiation between color, religion, and so forth, if I'm not mistaken in the last, summer Olympics in Tokyo last year, 2021, there was an US national who nationalizes Israeli and she was going to compete in the women's marathon or a competition of the like and she requested that the competition be moved to another day because she being very religious, she requested that transition to another day to comply with her religious, her Shabbat and her religious day, which I believe the IOC did not comply. So therefore, I don't know if she was able to compete in the end or not. So what are we discriminating? Who is this discriminator? In actual fact, I believe that we are hurting the progress of athletics as such. One thing, again, we're going to the beginning. Politics aside, keep sports clean, keep it essential. The problem here, what we're always talking about is we have all the interests of those sponsors to who make these games possible. And that's I think the key element here because there's a big gap between the grassroots and then those sponsors who want to have that appearance in the media and in the stadium and so forth. So who is ultimately pushing for this sanction? What sanction are you going to give to Russia? That's, I find it not unfair, but in actual fact, I find it it's confusing to the lay person who's not savvy about the rules, who's not savvy about the Olympic movement, but who is only concentrated in their sports and who wants to become one of the best athletes because not all athletes who compete at a high level want to become Olympic athletes, on the one hand. On the other hand, you get countries where there's an excess of athletes who have to change their nationality in order to compete for the country and be able to participate in the Olympics. So why do we sanction nations when those athletes can go under the Olympic flag as it has happened before with Russian athletes if I'm not mistaken? And again, other athletes who are subject, who are refugees and their country is in a civil war, those athletes also compete under the, I believe it's called the Olympic flag or something of the kind. So actual fact, who is the one who suffers? The country or the athletes? Riccardo, I think that's a really good question. I know you've actually co-authored a paper on national team eligibility rules, kind of discussing the increasing trend of footballers choosing to play for countries other than those in which they were born. I think you're referencing a statement such as this. In this paper, you discuss the Olympic Games Charter, which allows athletes with multiple nationalities to change their international federation. So do you believe this is a workaround for certain qualifying Russian athletes to try to compete for another country under another flag, as you mentioned, for another country? Let's put it this way, if there were Russian athletes who runs a hundred meter dash better than any US athlete, do you think the US would take them in? I would. I mean, it's a medal on the list. So, I mean, it's an athlete who wants to prove that the human body just, what the whole purpose of the Olympics is to develop that human capacity. Indeed, the stress that the athletes undergo in order to reach the Olympics is very, I'd say higher than any CEO of any multinational because their main enemy is themselves. It's not the flag under which they compete. They want to compete. They want to do the best. And if they're, God forbid, joyful enough and the country allows them to compete under their flag, hey, they were more than happy. Very proud to be an athlete representing their nation because it's the highlight of their career for some. Obviously you get other athletes who get to compete five and six Olympic games, which that is also very strange case on the other hand. I do believe that athletes should be allowed to compete under the flag of another nation, be it because of their family ties to the country, be it because their own country is subject to certain discrimination if we want to address it with those words, or because the country itself is undergoing a certain process. Let's look back at Yugoslavia in the 1990s. There all of a sudden from one country, you got five countries and new athletes who competed under different flags. So we are living now, I believe it is safe to say in an era where the Olympic movement has to reconsider all these different elements to allow athletes to either compete under one flag or another because on the end of the game, it's for the good of the sport. Leave aside what is doping. Some people say, I don't mind if you compete being doped, but at least tell me that you are. So I know as an athlete what I am going against. So Catherine, Ricardo is talking about doping here. Let's just get into the elephant in the room. We had a Russian athlete who got caught in a doping scandal. And this is on the heels of Russia being sanctioned for a state orchestrated doping cheating scandal for the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics. So Russian athletes in the past Beijing games had to compete under the umbrella of what's called the Russian Olympic Committee. So they couldn't technically represent their country of Russia. They couldn't display their flags and they were competing in this capacity. So what can you tell us about the 15-year-old Kamila Valleva who was permitted to compete at that, the games stirring Beijing? No, I have to say that that was probably the most dramatic scene I've ever seen in an Olympic Games. That was Kamila Valleva. She had allegedly taken some kind of medication that she claimed with her grandfathers. So they let her compete, but they said that if she meddled that they would not have a ceremony. Then what happened if you watch this, it was kind of absolutely crazy. Valleva, she actually came in fourth so that wasn't even an issue. But what was interesting about it was the fact that two Russians came in first and second. Sherbakova, Anna Sherbakova, she got the gold and Alexandra Trusova got the silver. And then Japanese athlete Sakamoto got the bronze. And what was interesting afterwards, they were all crying for different reasons. Trusova was absolutely hysterical because she felt like she should have won. And the gold medalist, she was totally ignored and then she was upset because she felt like the fourth place athlete, the alleged doper that she should have done better or something like that. And then Sakamoto, the Japanese bronze medalist was amazed that she even placed and was crying out of happiness. It was just incredible. And I have to say, I stayed up till about 2 a.m. to watch that because it just was really an amazing thing. But it was a difficult situation for the court arbitration of court cast to decide how to deal with an alleged doping incident. But on the heels of all the doping issues and that she was not even competing under the Russian flag, it seems to me that she was given a lot of deference to compete. But I think that the IOC actually and cast, I think they try to be fair. I think that they understand that these athletes have competed, have practiced and trained and competed their whole lives and that this is their chance and that they may not have another chance. And I think that Villieva, she's 15 years old, she will have another chance if allowed by her country. But obviously Russia is in a bad place right now. What happens to their athletes in the future is questionable because they've gone through this doping issues, they've gone through multiple wars and now they're pretty much not respected by, not respected by, or at least Putin and the country is not so respected in the international scene. Well, you mentioned the court of arbitration for sports. So they really leaned into the fact that she's a 15 year old and which under the Olympic rules, they don't consider, they consider her a minor and a protected person. So they gave her a lot of deference as that status as a minor and really are investigating the coaches and those that surround themselves with her as far as their responsibility for this test, this positive doping test. And they also, the panel also considered the fact that she tested clean and Beijing. She wasn't timely notified of her positive test and they really ultimately thought that it would cause her irreparable harm not to participate. So, I mean, one of the key things you mentioned, she got fourth individually but she did compete and score for the team and the team, the Art Russian Olympic Committee team did score, they got a gold placement which is still up for debate. So whether or not her points are gonna count towards that gold medal, I think are still up for investigation as to whether or not she, her points would qualify. And so, Ricardo, I know you've written some articles about anti-doping regulation in Spain for the World Sports Law Report. What kind of insight can you give us into this anti-doping consideration for this particular case with Thaliava? You mentioned one interesting point there. She's a minor and second of all, she was competing before getting to Olympics as we know. And it's interesting how she was competing in those competitions and they didn't do any blood checks before that. So that's also questionable. What happened before those tests? Wasn't she checked for anything? And secondly, I'm asking you, Catherine, that CAS arbitration was on site in Beijing, I presume, because those are the new adjunct courts that they have which are immediate. And obviously I presume that any good lawyer who goes with her would say, okay, this is the first test. Let's see the next test. Let's see what results come out of it. And let's see if this medication, what amount it is, how does it affect her performance? How did her performance change from one day or another and so forth? I think it was something so that she wouldn't suffer any pain or something similar if I'm not mistaken. In any event, I saw her skating and it's really impressive the new figures with which she comes out with. And in this case, I do have to say something. I do find it a bit abusive if you wanna say it, that a 15-year-old competes in the Olympics. I think that may be a bit too young for my feeling because there are other categories where children can compete and 15 might be a bit too young. I don't know why I say that, but I find that maybe 17 or 18 would be more effectable to compete at such a high level, which is the Olympics. Indeed, not all countries have athletes in all ages, but 15 or 14 to be able to compete in the Olympics, no matter what modality it is, I do find it for the child, for their psychology, for their progression as a human being. It's very harmful versus beneficial for themselves. And you can even see that in the response, Valiator's response, emotional response to this very stressful circumstances. But you know what, in response to the age thing for gymnastics and figure skating, age is very important because they're at their best when they're 15, 17 years old. So if the Olympics land when they're 15 years old, if they have to wait until they're 19, then that's a huge disadvantage for them. So because they might not be able to make the team because, and so I think the reason why for gymnastics and skating, we do see 15 year olds. I think it kind of makes sense. Swimming is another sport where age matters. Younger tend to be better. And it is up to the international federations to set those standards. Since we are close to the end of our time together, I'd just like to briefly hear Ricardo, if you can give me kind of your number one saying from a sports attorney lens, what do you think these organizations should do when it comes to athletic competitions either held in Russia or competitions with Russian athletes? What can these organizations do? Well, I think if we think about the sport, we should maintain an independent flag if you wanna call it for all these athletes just like we have athletes who are from Palestine territories or from refugees, they all compete under the Olympic flag. So why not? We're here for the sport and even those athletes sponsors will help them precisely in being financed to be able to attend these games. As we said at the beginning, the Olympic games have a lot of interest behind them and these athletes, if you take them away as we see with other competitions, many people stop watching those. So ultimately we all know that most certainly if this young athlete was not able to compete as a figure skater now in Beijing, many people might not have watched the figure skating competition. So in that way, it's a weapon which has two ways to go. If we don't bring her, we'll use audience. So, and then last, there are other elements as well that the national Olympic committees and international Olympic committee have to bear in mind which is exactly leaving politics aside. The athletes themselves, once they finish their career they should be more involved with the grassroots and help precisely those national Olympic committees to evolve and become more for the sport. Obviously having the business side there in order to promote and better educate those athletes which is what we want. We all know that- I'm sorry, I'll have to cut you off here. We're at the end of our time. Kathy, 10 seconds, what do you think? What should we do differently? Just keep in mind that the Olympic Games is a sponsorship event. It's a security event as well as a sporting event. And that's what we're looking at. And it's already a security event. Are we gonna make it more of a security event by letting a country violate the truce and continue to let them compete? Excellent, excellent discussion. And I appreciate both of your contributions today and your insight into the Russian invasion and the Olympics. And thank you to our viewers for joining us today on the sports playbook. In two weeks, our guest is Forrest Lodge from Sportable, an organization that provides sporting opportunities for persons with physical disabilities. We will see you then.