The Role of Major Sporting Events in Human Rights Violations: FIFA, the Olympics, and Beyond

Author: Megan Scopp, LLM

April 10, 2025

[Image source: Merca20]

The Global Appeal and Hidden Costs of Mega-Sporting Events

Mega-sporting events such as the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup and the Olympic Games draw in global audiences while generating billions in revenue, stimulating tourism, and encouraging international cooperation and unity. These events are the pinnacle of showcasing athletic excellence and national pride, drawing investments that promise economic growth and urban development. Host cities often use these events as an opportunity to exhibit their infrastructure, attract business, and inflate their international reputation.

Despite the international spectacle and promise of economic growth, there is a concerning pattern of human rights violations that these large-scale events cause. These violations primarily fall into three categories: labor exploitation, forced displacement, and suppression of civil liberties. The demand for rapid infrastructure development often leads to the exploitation of vulnerable workers, as seen in FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022, where migrant laborers faced unsafe working conditions and wage theft under the restrictive kafala system. Similarly, in Paris 2024 Olympics, concerns have emerged over precarious labor conditions and inadequate protections for workers engaged in Olympic-related projects.

In addition to labor exploitation, these mega-events have a history of disruptions to local communities through gentrification. Infrastructure development and urban renewal projects in host cities disproportionately affect and displace low-income and marginalized communities. The scale of these disruptions raises significant concerns about the long-term social and economic consequences for those affected, highlighting the need for stronger human rights protections in event planning and execution.

Beyond labor exploitation and forced displacement, mega-events are often accompanied by the suppression of civil liberties. Governments have used these events as justification for cracking down on dissent, restricting press freedoms, and increasing mass surveillance. As seen in past FIFA World Cups and Olympic Games, such measures disproportionately target marginalized communities and activists, reinforcing broader patterns of state repression.

Given the significant human rights concerns associated with mega-sporting events, this research explores the underlying factors that enable such abuses and examines potential solutions for greater accountability. It will analyze patterns of labor exploitation, forced displacement, and suppression of civil liberties across multiple cases, assessing recurring trends that contribute to systemic abuses while evaluating the effectiveness of existing legal and regulatory frameworks. Additionally, it will evaluate the human rights policies of governing bodies such as FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), scrutinizing their enforcement mechanisms and the role of national and international legal systems in addressing violations. Finally, it will explore potential binding legal mechanisms, oversight reforms, and corporate accountability measures that could mitigate human rights abuses and promote ethical governance in global sports.

By addressing these issues, this research aims to bridge the gap between human rights advocacy and sports governance, fostering discussions on sustainable reforms that prioritize human dignity alongside athletic excellence.

Labor Exploitation in Mega-Sporting Events

The Kafala System & Migrant Worker Abuses (Qatar 2022)

The 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar drew global concern about the severe exploitation of migrant workers under the country’s restrictive kafala system. The kafala system tied workers' legal status to their employers and created conditions where thousands of laborers faced wage theft, hazardous working conditions, and limited legal recourse. Human rights organizations indicated that many workers endured widespread labor rights violations such as extreme heat, excessive hours, and employer abuse.

The enforcement of FIFA’s 2017 Human Rights Policy, which outlines commitments to uphold internationally recognized labor standards, was weak. Investigations revealed that FIFA failed to implement effective oversight mechanisms, allowing abuses to persist. The Guardian estimated that thousands of migrant workers died during Qatar’s infrastructure boom, though the exact number remains contested due to government opacity. The Qatari government introduced labor reforms such as abolishing the exit permit requirement for most workers and establishing a minimum wage in response to international scrutiny. However, reports from Amnesty International indicate that many workers continued to experience delayed or unpaid wages, contract violations, and employer retaliation even after these reforms.

Precarious Labor in Paris 2024

The Paris 2024 Olympics positioned itself as a more ethically conscious event than Qatar 2022, yet major labor concerns emerged in the lead-up to the Games. Investigations into Olympic construction projects found that undocumented migrant workers had been employed under unsafe and dangerous conditions. Reports indicated that some workers were paid below minimum wage, denied social security benefits, and worked excessive hours without proper legal protection.

Organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Confédération Générale du Travail (CGT), a major French labor union, have criticized the lack of transparency in labor practices, surrounding the Paris 2024 Olympics, raising concerns that the event fails to meet international labor standards. Advocacy groups have further highlighted instances of migrant worker evictions and police crackdowns on labor protests as Paris was preparing for the Games. 

Despite Paris’s commitments to ethical labor practices, the Olympic projects face continuous scrutiny over whether these policies effectively protect vulnerable workers from exploitation.  The event's handling of labor rights served as a critical test of the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) commitment to human rights under its Olympic Agenda 2020+5. The limitations in labor enforcement mechanisms in Paris raised pressing questions about how international sporting events can ensure genuine accountability and worker protections beyond mere policy statements.

Forced Displacement and Community Evictions

Mass Evictions for Event Infrastructure 

The large-scale infrastructure demands of international sporting events often result in mass evictions, disproportionately affecting low-income residents. The Rio 2016 Olympics led to the eviction of approximately 77,000 residents, most with inadequate compensation or alternative housing solutions. Similarly, during the Beijing 2008 Olympics, an estimated 1.5 million people were forcibly removed from their homes to make way for infrastructure projects, highlighting the devastating social costs of these events.

[Image source: Google Search]

Anticipated Issues for Los Angeles 2028

Housing Crisis and Gentrification: Los Angeles is already grappling with a severe housing affordability crisis, and Olympic-related developments are expected to exacerbate displacement, particularly for low-income residents. The influx of investment and infrastructure projects may accelerate gentrification, further widening socio-economic disparities.

Surveillance and Civil Liberties Concerns: In addition to displacement, LA 2028 raises concerns over heightened policing and mass surveillance, echoing patterns seen in past mega-events. Such measures disproportionately impact marginalized communities, raising concerns over racial profiling and government overreach.

Risk of Increased Policing and Protest Crackdowns: Historical trends indicate that major sporting events in the U.S. often lead to aggressive law enforcement responses to protests, raising concerns about First Amendment rights and potential police militarization. These same concerns apply to LA 2028, where law enforcement expansion and National Special Security Event status could lead to further civil liberties suppression.

Legal Precedents from Past U.S. Olympic Events:

Atlanta 1996: Approximately 30,000 residents were displaced due to urban redevelopment projects linked to the Games.

Salt Lake City 2002: Security measures led to increased restrictions on protests and enhanced surveillance, setting a precedent for potential civil liberties challenges in LA 2028.

Vancouver 2010:  Thousands of low-income residents were displaced from the Downtown Eastside as the city ramped up development projects and policing efforts, exacerbating housing insecurity in one of Canada’s most vulnerable communities. 

Suppression of Civil Liberties in Mega-Sporting Events

Crackdowns on Protests and Dissent

The 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia serves as a prime example of how major sporting events facilitate government crackdowns on political dissent. In the lead-up to the tournament, Russian authorities arrested activists, implemented restrictive protest laws, and increased surveillance on opposition groups. Whereas Qatar 2022 imposed severe restrictions on LGBTQ+ rights and press freedoms with Human Rights Watch recording at least six cases of severe mistreatment, including physical abuse and forced confessions.

Mass Surveillance and Heightened Policing

Security measures implemented for mega-events frequently include mass surveillance systems, facial recognition technology, and increased police presence, all of which raise concerns about privacy infringements and racial profiling. The Paris 2024 Olympics, for instance, has introduced AI-powered surveillance, sparking fears of government overreach and excessive monitoring of marginalized communities. In Los Angeles, where the 2028 Olympics will be held, civil rights organizations have warned of militarized policing, racial profiling, and protest crackdowns, particularly targeting houseless populations and communities of color.

Erosion of Free Expression and Press Freedoms

Host governments often use mega-events to justify censorship and press restrictions, further curtailing freedom of speech. In China, ahead of the Beijing 2008 Olympics, journalists faced tight government controls, with foreign media subjected to surveillance and restricted access. Similarly, at Qatar 2022, international reporters faced harassment and detainment for attempting to document labor conditions and human rights abuses.

These patterns demonstrate that mega-sporting events do not merely pose risks to labor rights and housing security—they also serve as powerful tools for political repression, mass surveillance, and the suppression of fundamental freedoms. Without binding civil liberties protections in host contracts, FIFA, the IOC, and host nations will continue using these events to legitimize authoritarian control and human rights abuses.

Governance Failures: FIFA, the IOC, and Host Nations

FIFA & IOC’s Human Rights Commitments vs. Reality

FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) have each introduced policies aimed at upholding human rights, yet their implementation has been inconsistent and largely ineffective. FIFA’s 2017 Human Rights Policy commits the organization to protecting internationally recognized human rights throughout its operations. However, the 2022 World Cup in Qatar highlighted the organization's inability to enforce these commitments. Oversight mechanisms failed, allowing systemic labor exploitation under the kafala system to persist unchecked. FIFA’s failure to proactively monitor and penalize violations reinforced concerns about whether its policies can meaningfully protect workers in future events.

Similarly, the IOC’s Olympic Agenda 2020+5 emphasizes human rights considerations, particularly through integrating human rights provisions into Host City Contracts. However, the Paris 2024 Olympics highlighted the ongoing failure of meaningful oversight with concerns over labor rights violations persisting despite these IOC commitments. Undocumented migrant workers’ unstable employment conditions raise questions about the IOC’s ability to enforce its human rights standards effectively.

Despite these commitments, neither FIFA nor the IOC has independent, binding enforcement mechanisms to ensure host countries comply with human rights standards. FIFA’s human rights requirements for the 2026 World Cup include a Human Rights Strategy, but concerns remain over whether these commitments will be meaningfully enforced.

The IOC has taken steps to integrate human rights provisions into Olympic Host City Contracts, but still no independent body exists to monitor compliance, leaving enforcement largely at the discretion of host cities. FIFA and the IOC can avoid liability for human rights abuses associated with their events without legally binding accountability mechanisms, reinforcing the need for external oversight and binding legal obligations to protect vulnerable workers and communities. 

Prioritization of Corporate Interests Over Human Rights Protections

The pattern of civil rights suppression linked to these events suggests that FIFA and the IOC often turn a blind eye to state-driven human rights violations, prioritizing commercial and political partnerships over ethical governance. While mega-events are often framed as economic catalysts, their rapid development initiatives can disproportionately impact marginalized communities. Investments in infrastructure and urban renewal projects have historically led to forced evictions, displacement, and the marginalization of vulnerable populations. Notable examples include Atlanta 1996 and Vancouver 2010. 

Governments and sporting organizations often prioritize corporate sponsorships over ethical considerations. For instance, FIFA faced widespread backlash for considering Saudi Arabia’s tourism board, 'Visit Saudi,' as a sponsor for the 2023 Women’s World Cup, despite the country’s record of human rights violations, particularly against women and LGBTQ+ individuals. Similarly, FIFA’s sponsorship deal with Saudi Aramco, a state-owned oil company with ties to labor exploitation, prompted over 100 professional female footballers to demand its cancellation, highlighting the disconnect between corporate partnerships and ethical governance.

The failure to align sponsorship criteria with human rights considerations further illustrates the lack of real commitment to ethical governance by both FIFA and the IOC.

Lack of Independent Oversight

One of the greatest accountability gaps in international sports governance is the absence of independent oversight mechanisms to monitor human rights compliance.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights (UNGPs) encourage corporations and international organizations to respect human rights in their operations. However, these guidelines are non-binding, meaning FIFA and the IOC are under no legal obligation to implement them effectively. Despite referencing the UNGPs in their policies, FIFA and the IOC have not developed robust enforcement frameworks to ensure compliance. Their reliance on voluntary commitments rather than legally binding obligations allows host nations to evade accountability, reinforcing the need for stronger regulatory oversight.

Existing mechanisms such as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) may provide a legal foundation for prosecuting severe human rights abuses linked to sporting events. While the ICC primarily prosecutes war crimes and crimes against humanity, legal scholars have argued for expanding its jurisdiction to include systematic human rights violations linked to mega-sporting events. While human rights groups and labor organizations routinely report abuses, FIFA and the IOC have no formal process for independent investigations or compliance reviews. Without binding legal accountability, both organizations remain complicit in systemic violations that have persisted across multiple Olympic Games and World Cups.

Proposed Policy Reforms

Strengthening Human Rights Obligations for Host Nations

To ensure that future mega-sporting events uphold human rights standards, enforceable human rights clauses in bidding contracts, financial penalties for non-compliance, and independent monitoring mechanisms must be implemented.

Binding Human Rights Clauses in Bidding Contracts: FIFA and the IOC should mandate that host nations include explicit and enforceable human rights clauses in their bidding proposals. These clauses should address labor rights, anti-discrimination policies, and freedom of expression protections. The inclusion of these clauses would require governments to demonstrate a tangible commitment to upholding human rights before securing hosting privileges.

Sanctions or Financial Penalties for Non-Compliance: FIFA and the IOC should introduce financial penalties for host nations that fail to adhere to their human rights obligations. Enforcing these financial penalties for non-compliance would provide a tangible incentive for compliance.

Pre-Event Human Rights Audits and Post-Event Reviews: Regular human rights impact assessments should be conducted both before and after an event to measure compliance. An independent review body should be tasked with evaluating the host nation’s adherence to human rights commitments throughout the event cycle.

Creating an Independent Oversight Body

An independent human rights oversight body should be established to monitor compliance at FIFA and IOC events, conduct on-the-ground investigations, and recommend penalties for violations. This entity should collaborate with NGOs and UN agencies to enhance enforcement mechanisms.

Establishing a Permanent Human Rights Monitoring Group for FIFA & IOC Events: A permanent and independent human rights oversight body should be established to monitor and investigate human rights violations linked to major sporting events. This body should have the authority to conduct on-the-ground investigations, publish findings, and recommend penalties for non-compliance.

Partnering with NGOs and UN Agencies to Ensure Accountability: The oversight body should collaborate with human rights NGOs, labor organizations, and international institutions like the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the International Labour Organization (ILO). These partnerships would facilitate independent data collection, legal advocacy, and worker protection.

Whistleblower Protections for Athletes, Workers, and Journalists: To ensure transparent reporting, a confidential whistleblower system should be implemented to allow athletes, workers, and journalists to report human rights abuses without fear of retaliation. A mechanism for legal protection and reparations for victims of human rights violations should also be included.

Enhancing Legal Accountability for Governing Bodies

Stronger national and international legal frameworks are necessary to ensure that FIFA and the IOC adhere to human rights standards.

Regulation of FIFA and IOC Operations: Despite FIFA and the IOC’s autonomy, national governments can and should introduce stronger legal frameworks to ensure these organizations uphold human rights commitments. Introducing legal obligations within national jurisdictions would create a pathway for lawsuits and financial penalties against these organizations when human rights violations are committed under their watch.

Expanding Legal Frameworks for Accountability: International legal bodies should explore the feasibility of holding FIFA and the IOC accountable for complicity in human rights violations. The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and regional human rights courts could be leveraged to establish legal precedents for accountability. Comparisons to corporate accountability models in industries like garment manufacturing and mining highlight potential legal strategies that hold multinational corporations accountable for labor rights abuses and environmental damage. Similar mechanisms, such as mandatory human rights due diligence laws, should be extended to international sporting bodies.

Conclusion

Mega-sporting events like the FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games hold immense potential for fostering global unity, cultural exchange, and economic development. However, while these events serve as global spectacles, their economic and political incentives often come at the cost of human rights, with recurring issues of labor abuses, forced displacement, and civil liberties suppression. Without meaningful structural reforms, the same patterns of exploitation will continue to be repeated in future sporting events.

FIFA and the IOC must enforce real accountability measures to ensure that human rights commitments translate into action. Their existing policies, while acknowledging the importance of human rights, lack effective enforcement mechanisms. By integrating binding human rights clauses into bidding contracts, creating independent oversight bodies, and strengthening legal accountability, these organizations can shift towards a model of ethical sports governance that prioritizes human dignity alongside commercial success.

The effectiveness of these reforms depends on strong enforcement mechanisms and international cooperation. Ensuring meaningful penalties for non-compliance and independent investigations will be key to shifting towards ethical governance in global sports. Establishing sanctions for non-compliance, mandating pre- and post-event human rights audits, and ensuring whistleblower protections will serve as crucial steps toward greater accountability. Additionally, applying corporate accountability models from industries like garment manufacturing and mining can provide a legal framework for holding FIFA, the IOC, and host nations accountable for human rights violations.

By implementing these measures, mega-sporting events can uphold their promise of uniting the world through sport—without compromising the rights and well-being of the people who make them possible. If FIFA, the IOC, and host nations fail to act, responsibility falls to national governments, human rights organizations, and civil society to push for the systemic changes necessary to ensure that international sporting events are a force for good rather than a catalyst for exploitation. Without meaningful enforcement mechanisms, host nations and international sporting bodies will continue to prioritize financial and political interests over ethical governance. The proposed reforms—strengthening human rights obligations, establishing independent oversight, and expanding legal accountability—are crucial to ensuring that future World Cups and Olympic Games adhere to international human rights standards. Implementing these measures will not only protect vulnerable communities and workers but also reinforce the integrity of global sports governance.

---

Glossary

Mega-Sporting Events & Governance

• Beijing 2008 Olympics – A Games that forcibly removed approximately 1.5 million residents to build Olympic infrastructure.

• Bidding – The competitive process by which cities apply to host mega-sporting events, often involving human rights clauses and international scrutiny.

• Cooperation – The act of working jointly toward a shared goal, such as international coordination around mega-sporting events.

• FIFA – Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the global governing body of football, criticized for weak human rights enforcement.

• FIFA’s 2017 Human Rights Policy – FIFA’s commitment to international labor standards, criticized for poor enforcement.

• FIFA’s Human Rights Requirements for the 2026 World Cup – New FIFA guidelines that require human rights strategies in bidding proposals.

• Infrastructure – Physical and organizational structures (e.g., roads, stadiums) developed to support the hosting of international events.

• International Olympic Committee (IOC) – The governing body of the Olympic Games, responsible for overseeing host city contracts and human rights commitments.

• Los Angeles 2028 – The upcoming Summer Olympics, raising concerns about displacement, policing, and surveillance.

• Mega-sporting events – Large-scale international sports competitions such as the Olympics or FIFA World Cup that draw global attention and investment.

• Olympic Agenda 2020+5 – The IOC’s strategic framework aimed at integrating human rights considerations into host city agreements.

• Paris 2024 – The 2024 Summer Olympics, facing scrutiny over labor exploitation and surveillance concerns.

• Qatar 2022 – The 2022 FIFA World Cup, widely criticized for labor rights violations under the kafala system.

• Rio 2016 Olympics – An event that displaced approximately 77,000 residents, predominantly from low-income communities.

• Unity – The concept of fostering shared identity and global solidarity, often cited as a benefit of international sporting competitions.

• Urban development – A process involving infrastructure and community expansion that is frequently accelerated around mega-events.

• Vancouver 2010 Olympics – The 2010 Winter Olympics, criticized for its impact on low income communities and urban displacement.

Human Rights Violations & Labor Issues

• Amnesty International – A human rights organization that has documented and criticized labor abuses and civil liberties violations in FIFA and IOC events.

• Confédération Générale du Travail (CGT) – A major French labor union advocating for workers' rights, including opposition to exploitative labor practices in Olympic construction projects.

• Dignity – The right of individuals to be treated with respect and humanity.

• Ethically – In a morally responsible way, especially in governance or labor decisions.

• Exploitation – The act of unfairly using someone for one’s own advantage, especially in labor contexts.

• Human Rights Watch – A global NGO that has extensively reported on human rights violations tied to mega-sporting events, including Qatar 2022 and Russia 2018.

• Inadequate – Insufficient or lacking, often used to describe safety measures or legal protections for workers.

• Kafala System – A restrictive labor sponsorship system in Qatar and other Gulf countries that ties migrant workers to employers, limiting their rights.

• Labor exploitation – The unfair use of workers through practices like wage theft, unsafe conditions, and lack of legal protections.

• Limited Legal Recourse – The lack of access to legal protections for exploited workers in host nations.

• Migrant laborers – Foreign workers who often perform low-wage labor in host countries and face precarious working conditions.

• Mitigate – To reduce the severity or seriousness of a problem, such as human rights abuses.

• Opacity – Lack of transparency in decision-making or reporting, often cited in criticism of FIFA and IOC practices.

• Oversight reforms – Proposed improvements to monitoring mechanisms that would ensure compliance with human rights standards.

• Precarious – A term describing unstable and insecure working conditions often experienced by migrant laborers in mega-sporting event projects.

• Scrutinizing – Closely examining systems, contracts, or behaviors for ethical or legal violations.

• Sustainable – Practices that can be maintained long-term without causing harm; in this context, refers to ethical and lasting governance reforms.

• Undocumented Migrant Workers – Individuals working illegally on Olympic construction projects, particularly Paris 2024.

• Violations – Acts of disregarding legal or moral rights, especially in labor or civil liberties contexts.

• Wage Theft – The non-payment or underpayment of wages, widely reported among migrant workers in mega-sporting events.

Forced Displacement & Surveillance

• Alternative housing solutions – Proposed or temporary accommodations offered to those displaced, often deemed insufficient.

• Censorship – The suppression of speech or media, often seen in authoritarian regimes hosting international events.

• Curtailing – The act of limiting rights or freedoms, such as freedom of assembly or the press.

• Detainment – The act of holding individuals in custody, frequently without formal charges, often reported during controversial sports events.

• Disparities – Inequalities, often in wealth, treatment, or access, highlighted by mega-sporting event development.

• Exacerbate – To worsen or intensify an issue, such as economic inequality and housing crises caused by mega-events.

• Facial recognition technology – A biometric system used for surveillance that raises privacy and racial profiling concerns.

• Forced confessions – Coerced admissions of guilt, sometimes reported during policing of international sporting events.

• Forced Displacement – The removal of communities to make way for infrastructure projects linked to mega-sporting events.

• Gentrification – Urban redevelopment that displaces lower-income residents, often linked to mega-sporting events.

• Harassment – Aggressive pressure or intimidation, often experienced by journalists or activists during mega-events.

• Housing Crisis – A shortage of affordable housing often worsened by Olympic-related development and speculation.

• Housing insecurity – The condition of lacking stable, affordable housing.

• Infringements – Violations of rights or laws, particularly in contexts of privacy or freedom of expression.

• Mass evictions – The large-scale removal of residents from housing, typically for construction or security purposes during mega-events.

• Migrant worker evictions – The forced removal of migrant workers from housing due to development or surveillance pressures around mega-events.

• Mistreatment – Abuse or neglect, particularly of workers, protesters, or vulnerable groups during mega-events.

• Police crackdowns – Aggressive law enforcement tactics used to suppress protests or dissent during international events.

• Precedent – A legal or historical example that sets a standard for future action or interpretation.

• Racial profiling – Discriminatory surveillance or policing based on race or ethnicity.

• Surveillance – Monitoring of individuals or groups, especially through technology, for security purposes during mega-events.

• Vulnerable – At risk of harm or exploitation, often used to describe low-income or marginalized communities.

Governance & Legal Accountability

• Accountability – The requirement for organizations or governments to be answerable for their actions and decisions.

• Audits – Formal evaluations, often used to assess compliance with human rights or legal standards.

• Autonomy – The ability of an organization or state to govern itself, sometimes used in defense of weak enforcement.

• Clauses – Specific provisions or articles in legal contracts, such as those in host city agreements.

• Critical – Of essential importance or requiring urgent attention, especially in governance discussions.

• Enforceable Human Rights Clauses in Host Contracts – The legal inclusion of human rights obligations in city agreements for mega-events.

• Enhance – To improve or increase effectiveness, often used in reference to accountability or protection systems.

• Ethical Governance & Accountability Gaps – The lack of transparency and enforcement mechanisms in international sports governance.

• External Oversight & Binding Legal Obligations – Proposed reforms to ensure independent human rights monitoring at mega-events.

• Facilitate – To make easier or enable, often in the context of cooperation or reform.

• Feasibility – The practicality or possibility of implementing reforms or holding institutions accountable.

• Fostering – Encouraging or promoting growth, cooperation, or development.

• Foundation – The underlying basis or principle upon which systems, laws, or institutions are built.

• Freedom of Assembly & Civil Rights Suppression – The crackdown on protests and civil liberties often observed during major sporting events.

• Immense – Extremely large or significant; used to describe the scale of events or influence.

• Incentive – A motivating factor, often financial, for encouraging compliance with human rights standards.

• Independent Binding Enforcement Mechanisms – The need for regulatory systems that hold FIFA and the IOC accountable for human rights violations.

• Independent Oversight Bodies – Proposed external monitoring groups to track compliance with human rights obligations.

• Integrity – Adherence to moral and ethical principles; a goal of governance reform.

• Jurisdictions – Legal boundaries or areas of authority, especially in international law.

• Liability for Human Rights Abuses – The legal responsibility of sports governing bodies for rights violations in host nations.

• Mandate – An official order or commission to do something, such as enforcing human rights standards.

• Mechanisms – Systems or processes put in place to enforce, monitor, or regulate actions, particularly for accountability.

• Obligation – A duty or commitment, often legal or moral, such as those outlined in human rights contracts.

• On-the-ground – Localized or direct action and enforcement, often in contrast with top-down policy.

• Regulatory frameworks – Legal or policy-based structures used to govern conduct, including labor standards and human rights.

• Reparations – Compensation or remedies provided to victims of abuse or displacement.

• Restrictive Laws & Emergency Measures – Laws enacted by host governments to suppress dissent ahead of international sporting events.

• Retaliation – Punishment or retribution against those who report abuses or speak out.

• Robust – Strong and effective; often used to describe accountability or enforcement  Sporting bodies – Organizations that govern sports, such as FIFA and the IOC.

• State-Driven Human Rights Violations – The role of host nations in enabling or committing rights abuses linked to FIFA and IOC events.

• Tangible – Concrete or measurable; used to describe outcomes, violations, or reforms.

• Transparent Compliance Mechanisms – Systems designed to ensure host nations adhere to human rights commitments.

• UN Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights (UNGPs) – A global framework encouraging corporate human rights responsibility, though non-binding.

Legal & Corporate Responsibility

• Confidential Whistleblower System – A proposed mechanism for athletes, workers, and journalists to report rights violations without retaliation.

• Corporate Accountability Models – Legal frameworks from industries like garment manufacturing and mining that could be adapted for sports governance.

• Financial Incentives & Sanctions for Non-Compliance – Economic penalties proposed to ensure host nations follow human rights regulations.

• Human Rights Impact Assessments – Evaluations conducted before and after mega-sporting events to assess human rights compliance.

• Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence Laws – Legal requirements that could be applied to sports organizations to prevent rights violations.

• NGOs – Non-governmental organizations that monitor and advocate for human rights protections in global sporting events, including labor rights and civil liberties.

• Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) – A legal instrument that could serve as a foundation for prosecuting human rights abuses linked to mega-sporting events.

• United Nations (UN) – An international organization that works through entities such as the OHCHR and ILO to promote human rights and enforce labor protections in the context of mega-sporting events.

• United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) & International Labour Organization (ILO) – UN entities involved in labor rights and human rights enforcement.