World Athletics say they will stand their ground on their female eligibility rules, suggesting they’re unfazed by Caster Semenya’s challenge at the European Court of Human Rights.
Semenya has taken on the country of Switzerland after its federal court upheld a ruling by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that the regulations requiring female athletes with differences of sex development (DSD) to take medication to reduce naturally occurring high levels of testosterone to compete in events from 400m to the mile.
Semenya, the two-times Olympic and three-times world 800m champion and 1,500m bronze medallist at the 2017 world championships, insists she wants to race freely and this year failed in her attempt to qualify for the Tokyo Olympics in the 5,000m.
She’s shifted the battleground to the arena of human rights, and her lawyers were hopeful the case could be decided before the world championships in the US in July.
But World Athletics president Sebastian Coe was unflustered about the looming action. “Our regulations are here to stay,” he told the Sunday Times this week.
“We have defended them vigorously in the past and we will continue to do that because we do genuinely believe that this is a sensible and proportionate route through this particular challenge.”
World Athletics head of communications Jackie Brock-Doyle also questioned whether the court had jurisdiction on World Athletics.
I don’t think there is a clear route through to anything at this stage
— World Athletics head of communications Jackie Brock-Doyle.
“I don’t think anybody is really sure of where this jurisdiction is except the case ... is against Switzerland as a country as opposed to us as a sport ... I don’t think there is a clear route through to anything at this stage.”
Namibia’s two teen sprinters Christine Mboma and Beatrice Masilingi came under the DSD spotlight this season, and after being forced out of the 400m and into the 200m where they ended second and sixth at the Tokyo Games.
Asked if the federation was considering including the 200m into the DSD band, Coe said: “We’re not looking specifically at that, but I think the broader point I would make is that all our regulations, wherever they occur in the sport, are always under review.”
He was adamant the eligibility rules were in the best interests of fair competition.
“The Court of Arbitration found that the DSD regulations — their words, not mine — were necessary, reasonable and proportionate and were a means of achieving World Athletics’ legitimate objective of maintaining fair and meaningful competition in the female category.”
Another potentially sticky area is the technological improvement of shoes for both distance and sprint athletes, with a spate of impressive times being questioned by coaches and competitors. Comparisons are being made to the fast suits swimmers wore breaking a spate of world records in 2008 and 2009 before they were outlawed.
But Coe gave no indication of which way World Athletics might go on this. “We have a working group around shoes, we’ve been working on this for a year now.
“The balance here is between innovation that helps the athlete but doesn’t impact on the integrity of the event ... This is the first time we’ve actually got an evaluative system in place, we’ve never had this in the past. It’s work to be continued.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.