Vancouver Sun » “The IOC is accountable to no one — as female ski jumpers now know“:
When the B.C. Court of Appeal tossed out the complaint from the female ski jumpers last week, it also clarified who actually calls the shots regarding both the 2010 Winter Games and the Olympic movement.
Not the host governments of Canada, B.C. and Vancouver. Not the Vancouver Organizing Committee or Vanoc. Not the taxpayers who are helping to underwrite the Games to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
“The ultimate governing authority of the Olympic movement,” wrote the trio of appeal court judges, “is the International Olympic Committee (IOC), a non-governmental not-for-profit organization with headquarters in Switzerland.”
[…]
But no one should have any illusions about their role in the Olympic scheme of things. “All of these organizations are under the supreme authority of the IOC.”
Under the supreme authority of the IOC. Has an unmistakably autocratic ring, doesn’t it? The judges didn’t coin it. The phrase is right there in the Olympic charter.
In terms of what that authority means here in B.C., a lower court found earlier this year that notwithstanding the presence of a government-appointed board, Vanoc is under the “day-to-day control” of the IOC.
“Vanoc did not make the decision to exclude women’s ski jumping from the 2010 Games,” a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled. “Vanoc did not support that decision. Vanoc does not have the power to remedy it.”
[…]
That finding cleared the way for the judges to rule that the anti-discrimination provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are not engaged by the circumstances in this case. The Charter applies to “all matters within the authority of parliament (and) to the legislature and government of each province.”
The court found that the “supreme” IOC is beyond the reach of either. “The decision of the IOC not to add women’s ski jumping as an event is not a policy that could be or was made by any Canadian government,” wrote the judges. “The charter cannot be so broadly construed as to include policies or practices that no Canadian government has jurisdiction to enact or change.”
