Victory for Olympic champion Caster Semenya in discrimination case in international court

Caster Semenya wins the 800m at the 20th African Senior Championships in 2016. Picture: ANA Archive

Caster Semenya wins the 800m at the 20th African Senior Championships in 2016. Picture: ANA Archive

Published Jul 11, 2023

Share

Cape Town - In a victory for South Africa’s middle distance Olympic champion, Caster Semenya has won a legal appeal to compete without taking drugs to lower her testosterone levels.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday found that Semenya was discriminated against while challenging World Athletics regulations, as she was not afforded "sufficient institutional and procedural safeguards in Switzerland to allow her to have her complaints examined effectively”.

The case concerned Semenya’s challenge over regulations of the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) , now called World Athletics, requiring her to take hormone treatment to decrease her natural testosterone level in order to take part in international competitions in the female category.

Having refused to undergo the treatment, Semenya approached the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and the Federal Court for relief, but was rejected.

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday announced that Semenya had not been afforded a fair chance her to have her complaints examined effectively, especially since they concerned substantiated and credible claims of discrimination as a result of her increased testosterone level caused by differences of sex development.

“The high stakes of the case for the applicant and the narrow margin of appreciation afforded to the respondent State should have led to a thorough institutional and procedural review, but the applicant had not been able to obtain such a review. The Court also found that the domestic remedies available to the applicant could not be considered effective in the circumstances of the present case,” the court ruled.

The European Court of Human Rights held, by a majority (4 votes to 3), that there had been:

  • a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken together with Article 8 (right to respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and
  • a violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) in relation to Article 14 taken together with Article 8 of the Convention.

More on this story in Wednesday’s Cape Times

Cape Times