Modern Athlete Magazine Issue 118, May 2019 | Page 6

N EW S
I n
t h e
Compiled by Manfred Seidler
Caster Loses Controversial Case to IAAF
World Title in October. She demolished a quality field to post a 30 th consecutive
win, finishing in 1:54.98, the third-fastest time of her career.
The options open to Caster at this point are:
• She has 30 days in which to appeal the ruling.
• She can opt to run in events that are not part of the DSD regulations, i.e.
100m/200m or 3000m and upwards.
• She can go on the testosterone-reducing medication.
• She can take her case to the United Nations Human Rights Commission,
which has come out in support of her claim.
• She can go to the European High Court.
• She can quit the sport.
Caster and her legal team requested of the CAS that the new Differences of
Sexual Development (DSD) regulations proposed by the IAAF should be declared
invalid with immediate effect. Their claim was that the regulations are in effect
discriminatory, unnecessary, unreliable and disproportionate. The DSD rules were
first adopted last year, but suspended pending the legal battle.
The IAAF put forward the new regulations that would force DSD athletes
competing in events from 400m up to the mile to take medication to reduce their
natural testosterone levels. This after having cancelled their ruling with regards
to Hyperandrogonism. The IAAF contends that the new rules do not infringe on
athletes’ rights, including the right to equal treatment, but instead are a justified
and proportionate means of ensuring consistent treatment, and preserving fair and
meaningful competition within the female classification.
What has not been properly challenged yet is why the IAAF is only targeting the
400m, 800m, 1500m and mile events for the DSD Regulations, and has not thrown
a blanket regulation over all female athletes in the sport. Nevertheless, the CAS
found two-to-one in favour of the IAAF. According to the panel, Caster’s team had
not been able to establish that the DSD Regulations were invalid, and on that point
dismissed the case in favour of the IAAF.
However, the CAS also pointed out that the DSD Regulations are, in fact,
discriminatory, and would be very difficult to implement. However, they concluded
that although discriminatory, the basis upon which both parties submitted
their evidence meant that “such discrimination is a necessary, reasonable and
proportionate means of achieving the IAAF’s aim of preserving the integrity of
female athletics in restricted events.”
Defiant Response
The entire case has the scientific sports world, and the whole sports world, up in
arms, as this is a landmark case. The ruling now comes into effect on 8 May. Just
two days after the CAS ruling against her, Caster ran the 800m at the Diamond
League meeting in Doha, Qatar, on the very track where she hopes to defend her
6
ISSUE 118 MAY 2019 / www.modernathlete.co.za
Unethical Practice
Meanwhile, the World Medical Association (WMA) has reiterated its advice to physicians
around the world to take no part in implementing the new IAAF eligibility regulations for
classifying female athletes. WMA President Dr Leonid Eidelman said, “We have strong
reservations about the ethical validity of these regulations. They are based on weak
evidence from a single study, which is currently being widely debated by the scientific
community. They are also contrary to a number of key WMA ethical statements and
declarations, and as such we are calling for their immediate withdrawal.”
The WMA has urged doctors not to enforce the controversial new IAAF gender
rules and prescription of testosterone-reducing medication, warning that doing so
would breach ethical codes. “If physicians do apply these drugs, they will break
the basic ethical code of all medical practice to never do harm – and it is doing
harm to a perfectly normal body with just a rather high level of testosterone, by
administering drugs to use this in order to make them eligible for women’s sport
under these regulations. We do think it is extremely serious if international sports
regulations demand physicians to prescribe hormonally active medication for
athletes in order to reduce normal conditions in their body. Medicine shouldn’t
interfere with non-pathological situations simply to enhance sports activities.”
O
n Wednesday 1 May, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Switzerland
made a landmark ruling that could have major repercussions not only for
athletics, but sport in general, as they ruled in favour of the International
Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) in the case against South Africa’s
Caster Semenya, the two-time Olympic and three-time World Champion in the
women’s 800m event.
Given her measured reactions to the CAS ruling, coupled with the note in the ruling that
the implementation of the new regulation is in fact discriminatory, it is clear that this is
not the end of this challenge. She has made it clear she will fight the ruling, and that
she will not be moving up to the 5000m. When asked how she felt about continuing
to race against those who did not want her to, Caster told the BBC that it was
“bigger than her.” Asked if she intended to take the medication required to lower her
testosterone levels, she smilingly told reporters, “Hell no, that’s an illegal method.”