Mega-events
Host City Contract Human Rights Clause: What the IOC Contract Requires
The host city contract human rights clause is the provision in the International Olympic Committee's Host City Contract that obliges the host city, the host National Olympic Committee and the organising committee to protect and respect human rights and to ensure that any violation is remedied. It sits in section 13.2(b) of the contract written for the 2024 Summer Olympics and refers to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights as the benchmark.
When did human rights enter the Host City Contract?
The IOC announced on 28 February 2017 that host city contracts would, starting with the 2024 Games, include explicit human rights protections for the first time. According to Human Rights Watch, the revised contract had been finalised in January 2017 and first applied to the 2024 Summer Olympics.
The Institute for Human Rights and Business listed several Games that were hosted without such protections: the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang, the 2018 Youth Olympics in Buenos Aires, the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo and the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. The new wording therefore marked a change in how the contractual framework treated the subject, not a restatement of an earlier clause.
When the announcement was made, the host of the 2024 Games had not yet been chosen. Human Rights Watch and the Institute reported that the contest was between Paris and Los Angeles after Budapest withdrew, with the IOC due to name the winner at a vote in Lima, Peru, in September 2017. The clause was therefore written into the contract that the winning city would sign. The Institute called the step historic for integrating human rights into the earliest stages of the Olympic lifecycle.
What does section 13 actually say?
Human rights are addressed in section 13 of the contract, alongside ethics and anti-corruption duties. The obligations fall on the Host City, the Host NOC and the Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, usually abbreviated OCOG. The table summarises the provisions as described by Human Rights Watch and by the Institute for Human Rights and Business.
Human Rights Watch noted that this was the first time the IOC explicitly referenced the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The Institute for Human Rights and Business describes those principles as setting out the human rights responsibilities of business enterprises and the duties of states regarding business.
Read together, the provisions form several layers. Section 13.1 binds the parties to the Olympic Charter and the IOC Code of Ethics. Section 13.2 sets specific conduct duties on discrimination, human rights and corruption. Section 13.3 requires the IOC Coordination Commission to establish a reporting mechanism for those duties. Section 15.1 is separate but sits beside them, linking Olympic activities to the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
| Section | Obligation |
|---|---|
| 13.1 | Host City, Host NOC and OCOG abide by the Olympic Charter and the IOC Code of Ethics |
| 13.2(a) | Prohibit discrimination on grounds including race, sex, sexual orientation and religion |
| 13.2(b) | Protect and respect human rights and remedy violations, consistent with internationally recognised standards including the UN Guiding Principles |
| 13.2(c) | Refrain from fraud and corruption, including through reporting and compliance systems |
| 13.3 | IOC Coordination Commission establishes a reporting mechanism for these obligations |
| 15.1 | Activities embrace sustainable development and contribute to the UN Sustainable Development Goals |
Source: Human Rights Watch; Institute for Human Rights and Business
Who asked for the clause?
The Sport and Rights Alliance, a coalition of rights, labour, transparency and athlete organisations, had recommended the change. Its members named in the 2017 release include Human Rights Watch, the International Trade Union Confederation, Transparency International Germany, Amnesty International Netherlands, Amnesty International UK, FIFPro, Football Supporters Europe, Terre des Hommes, UNI World Athletes and UNI Global Union.
In February 2015 the Alliance wrote to the IOC president calling for rights-respecting Olympic bids. It also asked for contracts to include concrete and measurable human rights impact indicators, particularly for freedom of expression and assembly, housing and the protection of human rights defenders. Transparency International Germany reported that the revised contract reflected several of the recommendations, including the explicit references to the UN Guiding Principles and to anti-corruption standards.
What does the clause leave open?
The Alliance warned at the time that words on paper would not change practice. The Institute for Human Rights and Business reached a similar conclusion, stating that implementation would determine whether human rights impacts are actually prevented and remedied.
Human Rights Watch did not explain how the reporting mechanism in section 13.3 would operate, and the sources reviewed here do not say that the final contract contains the measurable impact indicators the Alliance had requested. Both points were open questions when the contract was published, and the 2017 releases treated them as the test of whether the new wording would change practice.
The date of a contract matters for any later assessment. Games awarded before the revision, including those listed above, were not covered by the explicit wording, so a reader comparing Games should first establish which version of the contract applied.
