- EN
- 中文
Human Rights NGO Safeguard Defenders, through barrister Michael Polak has today formally written to Mr Ban Ki Moon in his role as Chair of the International Olympic Committee’s Ethics Commission. In this letter, they have raised their grievance in relation to the failure of the Ethics Office to follow the Rules of Procedure Governing Cases of Possible Breach of Ethical Principles, and they have called on Mr Ban Ki Moon to either examine the Complaint himself or to appoint a new Ethics and Compliance Officer to do so properly.
The complaint was related Peng Shuai, the tennis player that went missing after leveling clear and unmistakable allegations of severe sexual misconduct by a former Vice-premier of the Chinese government, a highly placed Chinese Communist Party member, and committee chair for the preparation of the 2022 Winter Olympics. Since then, in one unconvincing episode after another, Peng has appeared in a variety of obviously stage-managed appearances to silence criticism, and withdraw her allegations against Zhang Gaoli. In the latest attempt, on 7 February, to squash attention to the issue - one which risks starting a #metoo movement in China, and one that could harm the CCP - Peng appeared in a scripted interview supervised by a member of China’s IOC committee, responding to pre-provided questions via a translator.
On 7 December 2021, London-based international human rights barrister, Michael Polak, was instructed by the Safeguard Defenders to file a formal written complaint to the International Olympic Committee’s Ethics Commission through its Ethics and Compliance Office as provided by the Rules of Procedure.
In the complaint, which was backed by evidence, it was alleged that:
Despite there being strict Rules of Procedure setting out how such a complaint must be dealt with, on 16 December 2021, the IOC Ethics team responded as follows:
The submission to Mr Ban Ki Moon, the IOC’s Ethics Chief, made today, explains that there are clear rules of procedure in regard to the treatment of ethical complaints which have been flouted in this case. All cases of possible breach of ethical principles must, according to the very specific "Rules of Procedure Governing Cases of Possible Breach of Ethical Principles" first be 'analysed by the IOC Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer, with a view to a possible submission of the situation to the IOC Ethics Commission’. After this analysis takes place, the Ethics and Compliance Officer should have then either submitted 'the complaint to the Chair of the IOC Ethics Commission’ for an adjudication. Alternatively, if the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer believed there had not been a breach of the IOC’s Code of Ethics, they should have ‘informed the plaintiff,‘ ie, the person who has made the complaint, who would then have had the opportunity to ask the Chair of the IOC Ethics Commission to re-examine the complaint.
In the grievance submitted to Mr Ban Ki Moon, it has been explained that as well as there being
Clear breaches of the 'Rules of Procedure Governing Cases of Possible Breach of Ethical Principles' by the IOC Ethics and Compliance Officer, Ms Pâquerette Girard-Zappelli, but also there has also been a clear breach of the principles of natural justice in that the subjected of the complaint has been allowed to determine the complaint, thus seriously jeopardising the purported independence of the ethics complaints process by making the IOC Executive a judge in its own cause.
The grievance requests that, given the seriousness of the complaint and the international interest in this matter, Mr Ban Ki Moon should either examine the Complaint himself or appoint a new Ethics and Compliance Officer to do so properly.
Michael Polak stated ‘the complaint we made is of the utmost seriousness as it concerns the involvement of those at the very top of the IOC in acts intended to shield the Chinese State from criticism for committing the international crime of enforced disappearance. The Ethics and Compliance Officer’s treatment of this serious complaint by simply referring to an interview with one of the main subjects of it, shows that the IOC’s ethics process is unfit for purpose. States who want to see the IOC as an ethical international organisation, not as a supporter of international crimes, must call for a properly independent ethical complaints process rather than the current farcical system whereby the Commission fails to even follow its own rules let alone basic rules of natural justice.’
*Michael Polak is an international barrister based in London. He practises in international, criminal, and human rights law from Church Court Chambers. Michael is also a Director at Justice Abroad which helps people who need assistance dealing with legal proceedings overseas as well as working on human rights advocacy. He is chair of the group Lawyers for Uyghur Rights and was awarded the International Bar Association’s Outstanding Young Lawyer Award for 2021.