One of the most discussed topics in the international sports scene is how far the freedom of athletes to express themselves should extend. Mbappé’s recent statements calling for a responsible vote in the upcoming French legislative elections is one of the various examples that could be offered in this regard. In general, the difficulty lies in reconciling an individual right, that of athletes, with the autonomy of federations to regulate competitions and make them as inclusive as possible, which requires, according to his interpretation, giving up externalizing the various ideologies to embrace only that of Olympism, which is much more ecumenical and inclusive, since it is based on sporting values. According to the classic justification, this would be the only way to overcome the grievances and offenses that could arise if each athlete or federation expressed their different values or beliefs. The universality of sport could then be in danger. However, this policy of neutrality has evolved and today the IOC is no longer so strongly opposed to forms of expression of the freedoms of athletes, which include the use of religious symbols. Not in vain, it has even included Rule 40 in what could be considered the constitutional charter of the Olympic Movement, which now states that “all competitors, officials and other team personnel at the Games shall enjoy freedom of expression, respecting Olympic values and the fundamental principles of Olympism.”
Just a few days before the start of the Paris Olympics, the issue of recognising individual rights for athletes in Olympic competitions seemed to be resolved, but a third player has entered the scene, once again questioning the fundamental right of athletes to religious freedom. Indeed, “in order to apply the constitutional principle of secularism, members of French sports teams cannot express their religious opinions and beliefs. Therefore, the veil (or any other accessory or clothing that demonstrates religious affiliation) cannot be worn when representing France at a national or international sporting event.” With these words on the public television channel France 3, Amelie Oudéa-Castéra, the French Minister of Sport, anticipated the imposition of absolute neutrality on the French Olympic delegation, also clarifying that there would be no room for any kind of religious proselytism.
As regards members of other national representations, for obvious reasons, France has no legitimacy to impose such limitations on them, and much less are they bound by a regime of strict secularism such as the one that is intended to be established. We would thus find ourselves with Games in which we could come to appreciate a right to religious freedom with two speeds, of greater amplitude for non-French athletes, giving rise to a comparative grievance of unprecedented precedents in a competition of these characteristics.
Will France be able to keep up with the rights of athletes to express their religious conscience? Perhaps the light we are seeking can be found in the IOC regulations. In light of these, the firm intention of the authoritative (political) voices of French sport on religious symbolism calls into question the foundations of modern Olympism. If we remember that these include values such as respect, human dignity and commitment to human rights, we can agree that the French sporting guidelines are taking a more than dubious path. Sport, as it has advanced in recent decades, advocates finding a balance between diversity and inclusion and, in this sense, should not serve to exclude, but to integrate, even more so if the forum in which the controversies arise are the Olympic Games. The best argument we can use as proof is the new Olympic motto. To the classic Altius, Citius, Fortius, in recent years, Communiter has been added. A conceptual expansion that does not seek, but to give the Olympic world a more supportive, more equitable and more diverse character, in which the suppression of religious symbols, we understand, should not take place.
Rafael Valencia Candalija is a professor of Ecclesiastical Law at the University of Seville.
José Luis Pérez Triviño is a professor of Philosophy of Law at Pompeu Fabra University (Barcelona).
You can follow EL PAÍS Sports on Facebook and Xor sign up here to receive the Daily newsletter of the Paris Olympic Games.
