Caster Semenya says World Athletics have 'serious questions' about DSD rules

Caster Semenya has been banned from women's racing since May 2019. Credit: AFP/Fabien Dubessay

Caster Semenya says the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) ruling in her favor raises «serious questions» about World Athletics' decision to keep her out of women's racing.

The ECtHR ruled Tuesday by a small four-to-three majority that the two-time Olympic 800m champion's initial appeal against the rules of World Athletics was not properly considered by the Swiss Federal Tribunal, criticizing the subsequent process rather than the verdict.

>

World Athletics' requirement that female athletes with high natural testosterone levels take drugs to lower it has been heavily criticized by Semenya, an XY-chromosomal sex developmental difference (DSD) athlete who refused to lower her testosterone levels and skipped the results. Olympic Games in Tokyo in 2021.

“I am delighted with the decision of the court. It was a long time ago,” Semenya said in a statement. “I have always advocated and will continue to advocate any discrimination in sports. I have suffered a lot at the hands of the powers that be and have been mistreated.

“The hard work I have done to become an athlete has been called into question. My rights have been violated. My career has had an impact. All this is so harmful. Mentally, emotionally, physically and financially.”

Semenya, 32, suffers from a condition known as hyperandrogenism, which is characterized by higher than normal levels of testosterone, a hormone that increases muscle mass and strength, as well as the ability to use oxygen.

She struggles with the rules imposed into effect in May 2019, forcing her to medically reduce her testosterone levels in order to compete.

Reuters reported on Wednesday that the Swiss government intends to refer Tuesday's decision to the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR for review as requested by World Athletics. This process can take up to two years.

“Justice has prevailed, but this is just the beginning,” Semenya said. “My case at the European Court of Human Rights was against a decision made by the Swiss government, not World Athletics itself, but that decision will still matter to all athletes, casting doubt on the future of all such rules. /p>

“I hope that World Athletics and all sports organizations will reflect on the statements made by the European Court of Human Rights and ensure that the dignity and human rights of the athletes they deal with are respected.”

World Athletics stated, that adheres to its own rules, which will remain in force.

“We continue to believe that the provisions of the DSD are a necessary, reasonable and proportionate remedy for protecting fair competition in the women’s category, as the Court of Arbitration for Sport and the Swiss Federal Court of Justice, after a detailed and peer review of the evidence, found that,” the organization said in a statement.< /p>

Shauna Jolly KC of The Cloisters, the lawyer who represented Semenya in the ECtHR case, said the landmark decision showed how sports authorities operated in a «human rights vacuum». ”

“This decision recognizes and takes into account the very deep power imbalance between sports authorities and athletes, or athletes and women in general, that affects their social, economic and fundamental rights,” Jolly said on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. /p>

“We convinced the court that we need to bring the athlete back into the frame by giving him the same structure of rights — this is the European convention that applies to all of us — because athletes have no choice. Custer had no choice but to go along with the rules imposed by World Athletics. She had no choice but to question the Swiss binding arbitration process, and she had no choice but to challenge it through the very limited procedures available in Switzerland.

“Throughout In this process, none of these bodies, neither World Athletics, nor CAS, nor the Swiss Federal Court, considered Article 14 of Custer [European Convention on Human Rights]. These are her rights to discrimination and her right to privacy. The court agreed with us and said, «Why should professional athletes be exempted from this?» responded, “This is not about trans athletes. World Athletics tried to do this with trans athletes, and the court rejected them rather harshly. It's about Caster, about discrimination against her on the basis of sex. It was a case in which many features required the very careful scrutiny that discrimination cases should have.”