A Jurisdictional Vertigo: Compulsory Arbitration, Sports and the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

Abstract This article discusses jurisdictional issues when cases related to arbitral awards of the Court of Arbitration for Sport end up before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). By focusing on the ECtHR’s Third Chamber judgment in the Semenya case, it discusses how the unique governance structure of sports governing bodies, as the benchmark for such disputes, has distorted the traditional jurisdictional paradigms of the ECtHR, posing challenges for the Court in addressing potential human rights violations in the realm of sports. This article argues that human rights claims arising from sports activities form a new class of human rights litigation stemming from the activities of private actors with a strong public character. Such dynamics grant the ECtHR a central role as the ultimate arbiter in protecting human rights within the realm of sports and require it to subject the sports proceedings to a comprehensive review both on procedural and substantive grounds, even with relation to athletes residing outside the territory of Council of Europe member States.